Ya Gotta Laugh! – Hillary, Rove, And The Snowflake Killer

We wrote why Karl Rove was stupid to talk about Hillary’s health. Now dumb has become dumber. Karl Rove: Let’s face it, Hillary’s “old and stale”. What does that make Jeb Bush? Poppin’ fresh? Whether he knows it or not, Rove is helping Hillary. Rove is hurting Jeb. And that makes us laugh.



Rove is not the only Hillary Hater that has brought us to laughter lately. Barack Obama supporters that hated Hillary in 2008 make us laugh in 2014. Remember 2008? Hillary was the enemy that had to be destroyed. Barack Obama was the future Reich that would last a thousand years along with his coalition of the ascendant storm troopers. Now, professional blowhard Charles Cook informs us that for many of those that proclaimed Obama the forever future and Hillary Clinton the dead turn-the-page past, the question is “Does Hillary Owe It to Democrats to Run?”:

The question of whether Clinton runs certainly evokes strong emotions in many people. At a dinner recently, a friend—one with clear Democratic sympathies—argued to me that if Clinton declined to run for president in 2016, the Democratic Party would have a right to feel angry with her, suggesting that she had an obligation to run.

How the worms have turned! Now the very Hillary Clinton they spurned, that evil corporatist Iraq warmonger dynast MUST RUN! Ya gotta laugh!

Wasn’t Hillary a racist? These Hillary Haters from the left accused Hillary of darkening pictures of Barack Obama and making dog whistle racist attacks. But now Hillary Clinton must run???? Ya gotta laugh.

Micheal Tomasky back in December 2012 demanded that Hillary run for president because, because:

And in this context, this context of keeping history moving forward, Hillary Clinton has not just the chance to run in 2016. She has the obligation to do so. Her party, and her country, will need her then, to consolidate gains and prevent the backsliding that the backsliders just can’t wait to commence. In other words, if the next four years go the way I suspect they might, it will be of the most fundamental importance that the Democrats hold the White House thereafter, and the burden of so ensuring falls squarely on the shoulders of Hugh Rodham’s rebellious daughter.

Here’s what I mean. I suspect that the next four years will go rather nicely for my side. The economy shows every sign of turning around and, one hopes, going like gangbusters three years hence. Obamacare will be implemented. Taxes—tax rates—will have been hiked. Immigration reform may well have been enacted. With a ridiculous amount of luck, a carbon tax. And all that will have been on top of Dodd-Frank, the equal pay act, and the other first-Obama-term accomplishments. We stand a decent chance, come 2016, of looking back on a pretty darn good eight years.

Ya gotta laugh! The economy turning around? Ha, ya gotta laugh. Economy going gangbusters in 2015? Ha ha, ya gotta laugh! ObamaCare working, tax hikes, immigration gates flooded, carbon taxes imposed, what a world what a world. Hasn’t exactly worked out as Tomasky imagined has it? Tomasky’s argument for Hillary then is that Hillary should run in order to keep in place Barack Obama’s obaminations and disasters. Harrddy harrddy har har. Ya gotta laugh. Hillary’s gotta run as the vestal virgin to Zeus Obama, stomps Tomasky and other Obama-the-lightbringer acolytes. We laugh and laugh.

Laughter ensues every time we hear from the “Obama is the future” crowd now clamoring for Hillary:

Clinton Apostates Trip Over Themselves to Get in Line Behind Hillary

Democrats who passed over Hillary to endorse Barack Obama in 2008 know they’re on the enemies list—and they’re jumping on the Clinton 2016 bandwagon as early as possible.

Ya gotta laugh. They know they are on the “S” list. They want Hillary and us to forget and forgive. Some of them also want to be able to stick a knife in Hillary’s back if/when something like Elizabeth Warren 2016 emerges. Don’t trust them Hillary. Gull ’em then cull ’em. We would invite these vermin to dinner only to poison them.

To these vermin Barack Obama was the future, Hillary Clinton was the hated past. To these vermin Hillary Clinton was a racist blocking halfrican-American Barack Obama. These vermin still think it is racist to not worship Obama.

Ron Fournier went to Arkansas and found hypocritical race-baiting vermin:

In Arkansas, Obama Is a Four-Letter Word Hampering Democrats

What Bill Clinton’s home state says about racial politics, control of the Senate, and Hillary Clinton in 2016.

LITTLE ROCK, Ark.—For five decades of Saturdays, Jerry’s Barber Shop has been a center of Arkansas politics, servicing receding hairlines for governors, legislators, and judges alongside the voters who elect and reject them. “I know how to make a politician tell the truth,” owner Jerry Hood says, “put a razor to his neck.” [snip]

“People are sick and tired of the path we’re taking. They’re sick and tired of Obama and Obamacare,” Hood says. His customers are mostly progressives from the shop’s affluent Heights neighborhood. “A lot of people coming in here talking about voting against every Democrat. They’re pissed off at Obamacare.…”

“How small businesses are treated …,” interrupts a customer with a shock of white hair.

“And Keystone,” chirps barber Doug Boydston.

Waving scissors like a conductor, Hood declares, “Folks around here are over that President Obama.”

Jerry’s Barber Shop is one the few places left in America where liberals and conservatives can be found together, laughing together, and talking politics. [snip]

A few minutes later, I pay for my haircut, say my goodbyes, and walk out. The bald man is waiting outside for me. He introduces himself as Robert Smith, then nods toward the barber shop. “How much of that do you think is about race?” I tell him the folks at Jerry’s are good people, but racial tensions are infused into much of American politics.

I think it’s about race and the fact that Obama hasn’t done the greatest job,” Smith says. “I’m a Democrat. I voted for him twice. I’m not one of them,” he says, nodding again toward Jerry’s shop. “But I may not vote Democrat this time.”

The bald guy, Robert Smith, voted for Barack Obama twice. This bald guy thinks opposition to Obama is racial. But this bald guy does not intend to vote for Democrats in 2014. So is the bald guy a racist? Or is the bald guy a race baiting hypocrite who impugns others as racists when they cannot defend themselves. Yup, a holier than thou race baiting hypocrite. We stop laughing.

But then we hear about some murders in California and start to laugh again. Yeah, we have to say we feel bad for the murdered and the community. But the person we call “The Snowflake Killer” is such a cartoon we gotta laugh.

The Snowflake Killer. Heterosexuals are in deep trouble. Heterosexuals on the left are really in deep deep trouble. First Judith Warner, in the editorial pages of the New York Times, fantasized about sex with Barack Obama. Now a 22 year old boi in California has used knives and guns to kill a bunch of people because girls would not have sex with him.

Such is the state of masculinity in America that fey Barack and the 22 year old have the audacity to believe they are in any way masculine or even “alpha male”. Here’s the notorious Youtube uploaded by The Snowflake Killer:



He’s a cartoon isn’t he? He laughs/smirks like a super-villain in a bad He-Man cartoon. Think Skeletor with a pronounced swish. He’s so self-unaware he presumes himself to be an “alpha male”. We suppose SnagglePuss was not available. We are crude to observe that The Snowflake Killer should be as sexually alluring to women/girls as Richard Simmons’ corpse. It is a relief to know that no girl was so self-abasing as to give this creep the time of day. He died a virgin. He deserved to die a virgin. He died a love-less virgin with all the sex appeal of Barack Obama at his stinky morning best.

We suppose we will be condemned for being so callous to point out that The Snowflake Killer was a fey little thing. We call him The Snowflake Killer because he thought himself so special, so humpy, so masculine:

Authorities have identified the killer, who left various video and written manifestos saying that he was seeking to kill sorority women and others at the university as revenge for the way women had rejected him. The killer — who subsequently shot himself — has been identified as a student who enrolled but frequently dropped out of classes at Santa Barbara City College.

Rodger posted a video on YouTube prior to the killings. In it, he outlined what he was going to do and said that the women deserved it for rejecting him. The Los Angeles Times published a transcript of the video. “On the day of retribution, I am going to enter the hottest sorority house at UCSB and I will slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blond slut I see inside there. All those girls I’ve desired so much. They have all rejected me and looked down on me as an inferior man if I ever made a sexual advance toward them, while they throw themselves at these obnoxious brutes,” the video says. “I take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one, the true alpha male.”

A “true alpha male”? Really? Who writes like that? Who talks like that? He’s a cartoon, like Barack Obama is a cartoon.

Some of the fattest on the left seized upon the California killings to denounce gun possession not bothering to mention the stabbing deaths which the left leaning 22 year old also committed. Ya gotta laugh.

Oh, and RACISM too. Yeah, the half Indonesian, half British cartoon is also a racist because… well he’s angry that “ugly” black boys got sex while he, descended from British aristocracy couldn’t get a girl to give it up. It gives us hope that the white girls he craved had enough sense to give him the heave ho. What a loser!

“I am beautiful….” writes the privileged Hollywood half-wit. Sounds like Barack Soetoro Obama. Ya gotta laugh.

Share

102 thoughts on “Ya Gotta Laugh! – Hillary, Rove, And The Snowflake Killer

  1. Hillary, just out of the shower, is FRESH as a daisy. She can slap Rove silly until the cows come home.

    Stinky Rove, on the other hand, is Humpty Dumpty trying to put his career back together. Talks like he is the expert, how did your white board predictions work out in the last elections? YOU couldn’t have failed more miserably.

    Back to reading Admins post.

  2. Ya gotta laugh. Labor and ObamaCare:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303749904579580604081967202?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303749904579580604081967202.html

    Unions and employers are tussling over who will pick up the tab for new mandates, such as coverage for dependent children to age 26, as well as future costs, such as a tax on premium health plans starting in 2018. The question is poised to become a significant point of tension as tens of thousands of labor contracts covering millions of workers expire in the next several years, with ACA-related cost increases ranging from 5% to 12.5% in current talks.

    In Philadelphia, disagreement over how much workers should contribute to such health-plan cost increases has stalled talks between the region’s transit system and its main union representing 5,000 workers as they try to renegotiate a contract that expired in March. …

    Labor experts on both sides say the law doesn’t take into account that health benefits have been negotiated by employers and unions over decades, and that rewriting plans to meet new requirements can affect wages and other labor terms.

    “It’s been a challenge for even some of the stronger unions to maintain the quality health plans that they have offered over the years,” said Daniel Murphy, an attorney in New York who represents employers in labor talks.

  3. Hmmm, I got an underlined link with the word ‘more’.

    What’s up with that?

    Is my grammar amiss?

  4. What a precious Snowflake:

    Girls, all I’ve ever wanted is to love you and be loved by you. I’ve wanted a girlfriend, I’ve wanted sex, I’ve wanted love, affection, adoration. But you think I’m unworthy of it. That’s a crime that can never be forgiven. If I can’t have you girls, I will destroy you. [Laughs] You denied me a happy life and in turn I will deny all of you life. [Laughs] It’s only fair.

    I hate all of you. Humanity is a disgusting, wretched, depraved species. If I had it in my power, I would stop at nothing to reduce every single one of you to mountains of skulls and rivers of blood. And rightfully so.

    You deserve to be annihilated and I’ll give that to you. You never showed me any mercy and so I will show you none. [Laughs] You forced me to suffer all my life and now I’ll make you all suffer. I’ve waited a long time for this. I’ll give you exactly what you deserve, all of you, all you girls, who rejected me and looked down upon me and, you know, treated me like scum while you gave yourselves to other men.

    And all of you men for living a better life than me, all of you sexually active men, I hate you, I hate all of you. I can’t wait to give you exactly what you deserve. Utter annihilation. [Laughs]

    [In another video taken near a golf course and posted on YouTube the same day, the killer revealed his jealousy at young lovers.]

    This world is so marvellous, full of beautiful places like this and yet, all I can do is just sit by myself and admire them. Every time I go out, I always have to see these young couples and I get jealous of them. They remind me of exactly what I’m missing out in life. Sex, love, companionship.

    I’m sexually attracted to girls but girls are not sexually attracted to me. There’s a major problem with that, major problem. That’s a problem I intend to rectify. [Laughs] I, in all my magnificence and power, I will not let this fly, it’s an injustice that needs to be dealt with.

    Who can resist such a charmer?

  5. I know my posting privileges will be revoked, but if this is my final post then I will make it count.

    Admin, if you had stuck just to the Rove silliness this would have been an awesome meme.

    But you dragged in an individual not worthy of one typed letter, not one thought and gave yet another 15 minutes of fame undeserved.

    He had nothing to do with the Rove ramblings. You should have just stuck with that.

    This post of yours “jumped the shark”. I have come to expect better of you.

  6. That killer thinks that women/girls should be murdered because they didn’t want to sleep with him.

    Too bad he didn’t off himself like an Alpha male instead of taking so many innocent lives with him.

  7. Bush family tool Rove is beginning to sound paranoid.

    He will support any candidate who is not tea party.

    Rove–not the Tea Party is killing the GOP.

    I have this to say to Porky Pig Rove:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBzJGckMYO4&feature=player_detailpage

    ———————

    In a bizarre attempt to maintain control of the Republican Party in California, Karl Rove’s hubris is beginning to take on almost paranoid features as he insists that if the Tea Party favorite — Tim Donnelly — wins the gubernatorial primary, it will tarnish all Republicans everywhere:

    Karl Rove, the prominent Republican strategist, said Friday that Tim Donnelly will be a liability for Republicans nationwide if the tea party favorite finishes second in the gubernatorial primary election and advances to a November runoff against Gov. Jerry Brown.

    “If the California Republican Party has as the leading candidate, the leading statewide candidate on the ballot this year somebody who has said the outrageous things that he’s said and prone to the outrageous behavior that he routinely engages in, it will be used to tarnish not only the California Republican Party, but they’ll throw it at everybody else on the ballot, and everybody else will, across the country, disavow the guy,” Rove told the conservative talk radio host Hugh Hewitt on his show.

    This paranoia is reaching scary proportions as Rove, Condoleeza Rice and Mitt Romney all came out to support the only guy — Neel Kashkari — who is competing against Donnelly in the primary. In my view, Kashkari’s record could only qualify him as a “DIRC” — Democrat in Republican Clothing:

    They’ve lined up behind millionaire former Goldman Sachs vice president Neel Kashkari. The 40-year-old, first-time candidate ran the federal bank bailout known as TARP – the Troubled Asset Relief Program – as a Treasury official, favors abortion access and same-sex marriage rights, and even admits to voting for Barack Obama in 2008.

    Why is this guy even pretending to be a Republican and why is the establishment so concerned about stopping Donnelly and supporting a man who is worse than a squish on every issue? In addition to being socially liberal, Kashkari actually voted for Obama in 2008 and has never run for public office.

    My point in this article is not to try to push a Donnelly win — although I think he will easily defeat Kashkari as he has all the grassroots and tea party support in California while Kashkari’s campaign is failing to gain traction. Pulling off a win in November against Jerry Brown would take a few miracles and is not likely to happen, but at least Donnelly will give Brown a bit of a fight.

    But the bigger issue is just how obsessed the establishment elite have become in thinking “establishment knows best.” Their arrogance is getting repugnant.

  8. Rove supports a Goldman Sacks vp?

    I am sure that will energize the base.

    I wonder whether the diagnosis is correct.

    I think he is more delusional than paranoid.

    His statements about Hillary are of the same ilk.

  9. Two flashes of profound insight emerge from this lengthy response to a scathing attack on Grrenwald by the pathetic weak suck Michael Kingsley butt boy for the big media establishment, and enemy of truth:

    Point 1: in the view of WashPo and the liberal establishment, it is impermissible and grounds for expulsion from the ranks of journalism to attack a democrat administration, whereas republican administrations are always fair game for fair and unfair attacks.

    Point 2: the Summers rule, as explained by Larry Summers to Elizabeth Warren: a politician coming to Washington must decide whether they will position themselves as an outsider–and be shut out from the process, or as an inside and feed at the public trough. If that politician decides to hue to the latter course then he or she must observe only one rule: insiders do not attack insiders.

    Now then, as a civil libertarian like you, me and Glenn Greenwald, tell me that does not turn your stomach. And then tell me how democracy can survive under those conditions. Pitch forks are in order, and the political class had better take cover. Notice how this same arrogance is personified by someone who is supposedly a conservative, i.e. Karl Rove. Incontrovertible proof that we have a uniparty, which rewards the political class and the elites, and preys on the rest of us.
    —————————-

    A Response to Michael Kinsley

    By Glenn Greenwald 23 May 2014, 10:39 AM EDT 926

    In 2006, Charlie Savage won the Pulitzer Prize for his series of articles in The Boston Globe exposing the Bush administration’s use of “signing statements” as a means of ignoring the law. In response to those revelations, Michael Kinsley–who has been kicking around Washington journalism for decades as the consummate establishment “liberal” insider–wrote a Washington Post op-ed defending the Bush practice (“nailing Bush simply for stating his views on a constitutional issue, without even asking whether those views are right or wrong, is wrong”) and mocking concerns over it as overblown (“Sneaky! . . . The Globe does not report what it thinks a president ought to do when called upon to enforce or obey a law he or she believes to be unconstitutional. It’s not an easy question”).

    Far more notable was Kinsley’s suggestion that it was journalists themselves–not Bush–who might be the actual criminals, due both to their refusal to reveal their sources when ordered to do so and their willingness to publish information without the permission of the government:

    It’s wrong especially when contrasted with another current fever running through the nation’s editorial pages: the ongoing issue of leaks and anonymous sources. Many in the media believe that the Constitution contains a “reporter’s privilege” to protect the identity of sources in circumstances, such as a criminal trial, in which citizens ordinarily can be compelled to produce information or go to jail. The Supreme Court and lower courts have ruled and ruled again that there is no such privilege. And it certainly is not obvious that the First Amendment, which seems to be about the right to speak, actually protects a right not to speak. . . .

    Why must the president obey constitutional interpretations he disagrees with if journalists don’t have to?

    Last Sunday, same day as the Globe piece, The New York Times had a front-page article about the other shoe waiting to drop in these leak cases. The Bush administration may go beyond forcing journalists to testify about the sources of leaks. It may start to prosecute journalists themselves as recipients of illegal leaks. As with the Globe story, this turns out to be a matter of pugnacious noises by the Bush administration. Actual prosecutions of journalists for receiving or publishing leaks are “unknown,” the Times article concedes. But this could change at any moment.

    Well, maybe. And maybe journalists are right in their sincere belief that the Constitution should protect them in such a case. But who wants to live in a society where every citizen and government official feels free to act according to his or her own personal interpretation of the Constitution, even after the Supreme Court has specifically said that this interpretation is wrong? President Bush would actually top my list of people I don’t want wandering through the text and getting fancy ideas. But why should he stay out of the “I say what’s constitutional around here” game if his tormentors in the media are playing it?

    This is the person whom Pamela Paul, editor of The New York Times Book Review, chose to review my book, No Place to Hide, about the NSA reporting we’ve done and the leaks of Edward Snowden: someone who has expressly suggested that journalists should be treated as criminals for publishing information the government does not want published. And, in a totally unpredictable development, Kinsley then used the opportunity to announce his contempt for me, for the NSA reporting I’ve done, and, in passing, for the book he was ostensibly reviewing.

    Kinsley has actually done the book a great favor by providing a vivid example of so many of its central claims. For instance, I describe in the book the process whereby the government and its media defenders reflexively demonize the personality of anyone who brings unwanted disclosure so as to distract from and discredit the substance revelations; Kinsley dutifully tells Times readers that I “come across as so unpleasant” and that I’m a “self-righteous sourpuss” (yes, he actually wrote that). I also describe in the book how jingoistic media courtiers attack anyone who voices any fundamental critiques of American political culture; Kinsley spends much of his review deriding the notion that there could possibly be anything anti-democratic or oppressive about the United States of America.

    But by far the most remarkable part of the review is that Kinsley–in the very newspaper that published Daniel Ellsberg’s Pentagon Papers and then fought to the Supreme Court for the right to do so (and, though the review doesn’t mention it, also published some Snowden documents)–expressly argues that journalists should only publish that which the government permits them to, and that failure to obey these instructions should be a crime (emphasis mine):

    The question is who decides. It seems clear, at least to me, that the private companies that own newspapers, and their employees, should not have the final say over the release of government secrets, and a free pass to make them public with no legal consequences. In a democracy (which, pace Greenwald, we still are), that decision must ultimately be made by the government. No doubt the government will usually be overprotective of its secrets, and so the process of decision-making — whatever it turns out to be — should openly tilt in favor of publication with minimal delay. But ultimately you can’t square this circle. Someone gets to decide, and that someone cannot be Glenn Greenwald.

    Greenwald’s notion of what constitutes suppression of dissent by the established media is an invitation to appear on “Meet the Press.” On the show, he is shocked to be asked by the host David Gregory, “To the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden…why shouldn’t you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?” Greenwald was so stunned that “it took a minute to process that he had actually asked” such a patently outrageous question.

    And what was so outrageous? . . . As the news media struggles to expose government secrets and the government struggles to keep them secret, there is no invisible hand to assure that the right balance is struck. So what do we do about leaks of government information? Lock up the perpetrators or give them the Pulitzer Prize? (The Pulitzer people chose the second option.) This is not a straightforward or easy question. But I can’t see how we can have a policy that authorizes newspapers and reporters to chase down and publish any national security leaks they can find. This isn’t Easter and these are not eggs.

    Let’s repeat that. The New York Times just published a review of No Place to Hide that expressly argues on the question of what should and should not get reported: “that decision must ultimately be made by the government.” Moreover, those who do that reporting against the government’s wishes are not journalists but “perpetrators,” and whether they should be imprisoned “is not a straightforward or easy question.”

    Barry Eisler, Erik Wemple, and Kevin Gosztola all have excellent replies to all of that, laying bare just how extremist it is. After reading Kinsley’s review, Ellsberg had a couple questions for him:

    Does Michael Kinsley think NYT’s Neil Sheehan—who “aided & abetted” the Pentagon Papers stories—should be jailed too? http://t.co/kpusmKU2Vo

    — Daniel Ellsberg (@DanielEllsberg) May 23, 2014

    I wonder how many years Michael Kinsley now thinks I should have spent in prison for revealing the Pentagon Papers? https://t.co/c0naeyeUFU

    — Daniel Ellsberg (@DanielEllsberg) May 23, 2014

    But there’s a broader point illustrated by all of this. Reviews of No Place to Hide internationally (the book has been published in more than two dozen countries, in nine languages) have, almost unanimously, been extremely positive. By stark contrast, reviews from American writers have been quite mixed, with some recent ones, including from George Packer and now Kinsley, attempting to savage both the book and me personally. Much of that is simply an expression of the rule that Larry Summers imparted to Elizabeth Warren upon her arrival in Washington, as recounted by The New Yorker:

    Larry Summers took Warren out to dinner in Washington and, she recalls, told her that she had a choice to make. She could be an insider or an outsider, but if she was going to be an insider she needed to understand one unbreakable rule about insiders: “They don’t criticize other insiders.”

    My book, and my writing and speaking more generally, usually criticizes insiders, and does so harshly and by name, so much of this reaction is simply a ritual of expulsion based on my chronic violation of Summers’ rule. I find that a relief.

    But even the positive reviews of the book in the U.S. (such as from the Times‘ book critic Michiko Kakutani) took grave offense to its last chapter, which argues that the U.S. media is too close and subservient to the U.S. government and its officials, over whom the press claims to exercise adversarial oversight. This condemnation of the U.S. media, argued even many of the positive reviewers, is unfair.

    But here, it wasn’t just Kinsley who mounted an argument for the criminalization of journalism when done against the government’s wishes. Almost instantly, other prominent journalists–NBC’s David Gregory, The Washington Post’s Charles Lane, New York’s Jonathan Chait–publicly touted and even praised Kinsley’s review.

    So let’s recap: The New York Times chose someone to review my book about the Snowden leaks who has a record of suggesting that journalists may be committing crimes when publishing information against the government’s wishes. That journalist then proceeded to strongly suggest that my prosecution could be warranted. Other prominent journalists —including the one who hosts Meet the Press–then heralded that review without noting the slightest objection to Kinsley’s argument.

    Do I need to continue to participate in the debate over whether many U.S. journalists are pitifully obeisant to the U.S. government? Did they not just resolve that debate for me? What better evidence can that argument find than multiple influential American journalists standing up and cheering while a fellow journalist is given space in The New York Times to argue that those who publish information against the government’s wishes are not only acting immorally but criminally?

  10. I rather suspect that Sharyl Attkisson will have more to say on this subject.

    It is late, but never too late to check in with her.

    Good night to all of you.

  11. VotingHillary May 28, 2014 at 1:11 am

    ********

    I’m with you on those sentiments. I don’t see the point at all of publicizing this Rodgers guy.

  12. I overall agree with Admin. My general point is that the Democrats have a “cultural” elite problem. The country is sick of it. It is a pendulum, that most were barely aware of or felt uncomfortable with, that is swinging back. Downplaying or trying to ignore the medical neglect of our veterans which is a case study of the methods which will be used by Obamacare to cut medical costs and institute central control of who lives and dies, idiot claims for more gun control in a state that has the most gun control already for a murderer who used a sharp object or auto to dispatch most of his victims as well as cries of misogyny when 2/3 of his body count were males, rampant narcissism with various loons claiming they are smarter, more talented, and deserving who think they can do no wrong committing crimes both in the public at large and in the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. The media who thought they had all the answers in 2007-2008 and were ushering in a golden age of righteous Democratic progressivism are confused and struggling to keep up. The public has already decided that this entitled segment of the society are crazy and do not know what the hell they are doing. As for Karl Rove, the Tea Party cleaned up in Texas yesterday. Old news Karl, day late and a dollar short Karl lost pretty big because he doesn’t keep up very well. The pendulum has swung.

  13. Admin said
    How the worms have turned! Now the very Hillary Clinton they spurned, that evil corporatist Iraq warmonger dynast MUST RUN! Ya gotta laugh!
    ________________________________

    Yepper!! Those worms are turning so fast they are half way to China by now!!! 🙄

  14. Mormaer
    May 28, 2014 at 8:56 am
    —————-
    Brilliant–as usual.

    One comment: I have been at a loss to explain Karl Rove’s support for anti Republican Goldman Sachs candidates in venues like California, which will cause the base of his party to stay home, his nasty counterintuitive comments about Hillary, and his now visible descent into paranoia, delusion and madness. Thanks to your post the diagnosis is suddenly obvious: Rove is a Bush toadie, yesterday the Bush establishment lost to the Tea Party on its on turf, i.e. Texas, and as a notorious Irish barn yard politician from Boston named Tip O’Neill once observed “all politics is local”.

  15. My general point is that the Democrats have a “cultural” elite problem.
    ————-
    They do. And so does their partner in crime, big media. And that was the market niche that Roger Ailes of FOX News saw and exploited for fun and money at his network. Every day it seems, big media spews out elitist bullshit, and spits in the face of the average American. Whereupon, every day FOX News calls them on it, and makes them out to be aloof fools.

    When and if Ailes decides to go on the regular channels as well as cable he will clean the clocks of big media, because big media’s to the manor born biases–I hesititate to call them values are repugnant to the time honored values of the American People. At the core level they are nihilistic.

  16. VotingHillary, you missed our point. Neither Rove’s ramblings nor the Snowflake Killer deserve attention. The symmetry of a Rove video at top with Snowflake’s video at bottom is how we attempted to underline that connection – sorry you missed that. BTW, Obama doesn’t deserve more attention either.

    As to Snowflake and undeserved attention to him, we would like to ignore Obama, Rove, and Snowflake but unfortunately we can’t. They’re in the news and policy is made from incidents such as these killings. We try to mock and defuse the attention the Rove/Obama/Snowflakes undeservingly get. The Snowflake matter was one we typically ignore but in this case we could not on policy grounds but you will notice we never used Snowflake’s name. All we did was ridicule him. That is what should be done with these killers.

    Like it or not some on the left are using Snowflake to advance an anti-gun agenda. Perhaps you also missed that a lot of boys and girls took to Twitter and other social media to praise Snowflake’s good looks and how sexy he was. We don’t like that but we can’t ignore it either. We think our course of action was the appropriate one. We mock him and call him what he is, a “loser”. The special Snowflakes who cause such havoc (think Obama) have to be ridiculed and mocked so that others do not in any way think they are special. We wrote much the same with the Snowflake Boston Bombers and the Loughner (Loner) flake.

    As to all the deep thoughts in places such as The Atlantic (a tiresome article on the meaning of masculinity) we are not going to provide deep thoughts on this Snowflake cartoon. Let others provide deep thoughts on the meaning of masculinity, gender stereotypes or other claptrap. This guy was a loser that reminded us of Snagglepuss and Skeletor and we wrote that without worrying that our views might cause distress. We posted Snowflake’s video to let everyone see what a clown cartoon he was and we noted that this self-described “alpha male” was a simpering whimpering dullard. We think it is a tribute to the girls/women of California that they rejected this obnoxious tool. To the girls/women of California we say “Ya done good.”

  17. Mormaer, since 2007 we have written many articles on the Obama coalition versus the FDR/Clinton coalition. Our main target has been Ruy Teixiera who convinced many in the party that the “coalition of the ascendant” demanded Obama and not Hillary in 2008. Teixiera is not a bright bulb but his gimmicky charts convinced many in the party he was right.

    As we note in our article, now the “coalition of the ascendant” is stripped naked and seen as the loser it is. Opportunist Teixiera is now trying to refashion himself as an advocate for overtures to the white working class he once insisted no longer mattered.

    http://freebeacon.com/issues/cap-cancels-rollout-of-project-aimed-at-working-class-white-voters/

    CAP Cancels Rollout of Project Aimed at Working Class White Voters
    ‘Bobby Kennedy Project’ put off until 2016 due to ‘insufficient funding’

    A top liberal group has temporarily abandoned plans for a new project designed to court white working class voters after it could not marshal the necessary financial support for the project, according to documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

    The Center for American Progress planned to roll out a new effort last year called the Bobby Kennedy Project. However, insufficient funding for the project forced the group to postpone its launch until 2016.

    The stated need for the project suggests potential pitfalls for Democrats in its eventual delay: In a midterm election year expected to heavily favor Republicans, CAP has apparently abandoned, for the time being, an effort to reach out to a constituency that it acknowledges could determine the viability of the Democrats’ voting coalition going forward.

    The Bobby Kennedy Project was the brainchild of CAP senior fellow Ruy Teixeira, who for the past decade has stressed that a lasting Democratic majority will require the party to make inroads with white working class voters.

    Teixeira coauthored the 2004 book The Emerging Democratic Majority, which acknowledged the conservative leanings of white working class voters, but argued that a long-term Democratic majority would require the party “get close to an even split” among that demographic.

    Teixeira expanded on that point in a 2013 New Republic column coauthored with Andrew Levison, author of The White Working Class Today: Who They Are, How They Think and How Progressives Can Regain Their Support.

    “To create a stable Democratic majority, Democrats need to win the support of a significant group of voters who are now part of the Republican coalition,” they wrote.

    “As the 2012 elections demonstrated, the group that has perhaps the greatest potential in this regard is the white working class. … The white working class has the potential to be a—if not the—decisive swing voter group for the future.”

    The article above is revisionist history. Teixiera in 2008 wrote that the “coalition of the ascendant” did not need the white working class to win elections in the future. We noted how foolish that was and by 2010 we were proven right. Since then we have noted how Teixiera is trying to rewrite history. Teixiera is busy revising history in the hopes no one will notice he is the author of a policy that killed the party.

  18. Admin: I agree with your point that the hard left seizes upon tragedies to advance their policy agenda, which is anti gun. The rationale behind their anti gun agenda is clear–to deprive law abiding citizens of the symbolic power to resist the tyrannical and oppressive government which they seek to impose. That effort goes hand in glove with their effort to gut the constitution and vest all political power in the unitary executive who can govern according to his whims, and change the fundamental character of this nation at will. And, it is consistent with their open border position which is couched in terms of social justice but is in fact an attempt to import a new electorate of low skills and a dependency on government. I wish I could get people to see the game here. But they are just to stupid to connect the dots, or are afraid to be labeled conspiratorial if they dare to challenge the elites. That posting above by the estimable Glenn Greenwald who is a latter day version of Paul Revere is laced with insights, not the least of which is the Summers Rule, that insiders do not attack insiders, period, as Obama says when he wants to be emphatic that he will do something, when the world knows he will do nothing but fuck off and speechify until Tom Friedman swoon. So tell me, what happens when insiders are enjoined from criticizing insiders? First, the truth is suppressed. Second, accountability is erased. And third, the elite class, and their internal pecking order, and their lordship over the vassals is preserved. If only the American People were smart enough to figure this out. Young people imagine that benevolent dictatorship is possible. I do not. All history points in the opposite direction.

  19. Admin: I agree with your point that the hard left seizes upon tragedies to advance their policy agenda, which is anti gun
    ————–
    Yet another example of the legal saying that hard cases make bad law. Why? Because tragedies and hard cases elicit an emotional response as opposed to a cautious and thoughtful one. Bad precedent is layered on bad precedent until the liberty which makes life bearable is eliminated, and we all become vassals to the whim of our betters. Betters like, oh, lets see, that little maggot Mike Bloomberg, aka Bloomie. Where is it written that idiot must do what Bloomie says. What makes him the Delphic Oracle? Separation of powers, not consolidation of power is sine qua non for anyone who thinks about this, and values liberty. By the way, I am very impressed with the transformation of Kirsten Powers, and I believe she is the kind of thinker and statesman who will do this nation well in the years ahead. My kind of Democrat.

  20. 91-year-old Republican Rep. Ralph Hall, the oldest person to ever serve in the U.S. House, was defeated in the GOP runoff primaries by John Ratcliffe.
    —————-
    This saddens me. Hall is one of the finest men and politicians I have had the pleasure of meeting. He was a carrier pilot in World War II, a state judge, a democrat, and finally a republican. When I met him he was a democrat. My friend the congresswoman, some cattlemen and I had dinner with him in a small café in east Texas in the late 1990s. He is a good human being. But I suppose 91 is getting up there.

  21. admin
    May 28, 2014 at 11:00 am

    She stood with Hillary in 2008. Now Maya Angelou is dead at 86.
    ______________________________

    RIP There is a new Angel in Heaven today. <3

  22. Mary Landieu and Charles Laughton look an awful lot alike. I wonder whether they are related.

  23. Laughton, of course, was a much better actor. But the physical resemblance between the two of them is, to say the least, striking.

  24. I have to agree with admin on the Killer Snowflake. The child was not in touch with reality. Politicizing his illness is just as sick and warrents a response. Never let a good tragedy go to waste. So many groups trying to latch on to promote their agenda is twisted. Some are screaming that it is the white male driven Hollywood culture that drove him to his actions. Well they can not have it both ways. If watching Gratuitous violence yields anti-social behaviour on one hand then are conservatives to be attacked for claiming that ubiquitous dosplays of homosexuality on tv cause a child to be gay? Good for the goose good for the gander. Tragic that six people lost their young promising lives but using it to limit the second amendment is wrong. Staying silent only gives the opportunists a platform.

  25. I have a solution for California gun laws, take all guns away from anyone that voted for Obama.

    That should just about cover all the nitwits, gang members, Snowflakes, idiots and crooks.

    Isn’t it odd that all of these groups voted for Obama.

    Let the responsible adults keep the guns, they don’t let their children play with them, they don’t go all gun-toting to parties, street car races and raves.

    Yup, that should just about solve the gun issue in California.

  26. I was thinking about Kathleen Sebelius–the red queen, and what her future political prospects look like after her tenure as Captain of the good ship Titanic otherwise known as OBABACARE, or, if you prefer, the greatest civil rights victory since 1964 according to that purveyor of truth the NYT–the greatest collection of sick bastards outside the psycho ward with or without Fast Eddie Schultz, the Howard Beal of the sewer pipe known as MSNBC.

    So how goes it, Kate? After that glorious sendoff by the Messiah, thanking you for your selfless service to the country and the party and Obama, Obama, and Obama, not necessarily in that order. Word has it that you are now contemplating a stint in the Senate, you and the bureacrat walrus you are married to. And you certainly played your cards well, didn’t you, from governor to bureaucrat just as Franz Kafka envisioned, but like that desert flower in the opening narrative to Duel in the Sun, your standing within the party was first to flower, and soon to die.

    But just because you are now a pariah, does not mean you are unelectable in Kansas, where the corn is as high as an elephant’s eye, and the uniparty is alive and well and insiders do not attack insiders. Fancy this, Kate. Your daddy was a big politico. He hired the current Republican senator Pat Roberts to work for him, befriended Bob Dole, and when your hour in the sun arrived, and you got to meet that secular god of liberalism and drunken vainglorious lout Teddy Kennedy, these Republicans stood with you a democrat in perfect bi-partisan harmony. Ask the man in the street and he will say bi-partisanship is good. Ask me and I say good for whom? Why for insiders of course. And I have it on the best authority, namely Larry Summers, that insiders do not criticize insiders, lest the generations fail.

  27. Shadowfax
    May 28, 2014 at 2:40 pm
    ______________________________

    Brilliant Shadow not just there but every where. Cause all those people are clearly unstable. 😀

  28. Unbelievable!!!! 👿

    The State Department’s Counter Terrorism (CT) Bureau apologized on Tuesday for promoting a controversial Muslim scholar whose organization has reportedly backed Hamas and endorsed a fatwa authorizing the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

    The apology came on the heels of a Friday Washington Free Beacon report detailing the CT Bureau’s promotion of Sheik Abdallah Bin Bayyah, the vice president of a radical Muslim scholars group that was founded by a radical Muslim Brotherhood leader who has called “for the death of Jews and Americans.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/27/state-dept-apologizes-for-promoting-muslim-cleric-who-backed-killing-us/?intcmp=latestnews

  29. Foxyladi14
    May 28, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    Unbelievable!!!! 👿

    ————–
    Actually, it is both believable and predictable given Obama’s new age doctrine of foreign policy. From the beginning up to and including now, the Obama doctrine had the smell of the lamp to it, meaning that is was based on unproven theory and a wild leap of faith. And now? Now it is crashing down on the ears of this country, while Obama skates, and big media falls to its knees in worship. Once again here is that alternative theory, which reached its grand climeractic in Benghazi, the case that big media, who is up to its ears in it, hopes to hide from the nation:
    ——————-
    “Benghazi had its roots in an alternative theory of foreign policy formed in Obama’s team at around the time of the Surge in Iraq. From that experience, Obama’s advisers persuaded him that it would be possible to “turn” America’s enemies by taking control of them instead of fighting them. It was a dazzling prospect which offered victory on the cheap.

    It was to be built on three pillars: covert action, targeted assassinations and diplomacy. The idea was simple, instead of relying on the regular military, the Obama administration would take over the most dangerous jihadi groups through intelligence agencies. Through this mechanism they would become their patrons and cement the relationship with diplomatic deals with their Gulf funders. Drones and hunter killer squads would be employed to promote chosen intelligence assets — American agents — to positions of responsbility in the terror cells. The drones would clear the way for designated jihadis to rise within the ranks. Eventually America would own the jihad and neuter it from within.

  30. We need less Government intruding in our lives not more. 😡

    I, unlike many others, don’t have a huge problem with the First Lady pushing for healthier eating. It’s a fine message, we do have a childhood obesity problem, and I’d rather meddlesome liberals be in the business of encouraging such things socially than mandating them. But this school lunch overhaul seems to be a perfect example of how a basically unobjectionable encouragement to eat healthier can become a disaster when the government attempts to implement it in a one-size-fits-all program.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/27/everyone-hates-michelle-obamas-school-lunches-because-republicans/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=haupdate

  31. foxyladi14
    May 28, 2014 at 5:54 pm
    _________________________

    Plus the fact that government is pushing the wrong advice again. Read “The Big Fat Surprise” by Nina Teicholz to learn about the history of all the misguided nutritional advice promoted by the government despite the absence of solid scientific evidence.

  32. Ya gotta laugh. ObamaCare cheerleader and head Journolister Ezra Klein from June 2009:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/does_the_government_run_health.html

    Does The Government Run Health Care Better?

    Health-care bloggers Merrill Goozner and Joe Paduda are talking about one of my favorite ideas: expanding the Veterans Health Administration to non-veterans. To understand why this would be a good idea, read Phil Longman’s definitive article on the subject.

    I’ve been thinking of writing a really long post along these lines, but the short version is this: If you crudely ordered America’s different health-care systems from least government control to most, it would look something like this: individual insurance market, employer-based insurance market, Medicare, Veterans Health Administration (Medicare is single-payer, but VA is actually socialized medicine, where the government owns the hospitals and employs the doctors).

    If you ordered America’s different health systems worst-functioning to best, it would look like this: individual insurance market, employer-based insurance market, Medicare, Veterans Health Administration.

    That symmetry should get more attention in the health-care discussion than it does.

    That boi has a screw loose. Adding to Shadowfax’s reasonable proposal to take guns away from Obama voters we add: take their keyboards away too.

  33. Take away their computers and smartphones too, basically anything they can use to transmit hogwash to the Internet.

  34. Brian Williams is doing his best to try and make Snowden look bad. And he is failing miserably. I REALLY like and am REALLY impressed by that young man. The first thing you see is that he is very very smart, and his intelligence exposes this administration, and actually Bush’s administration as well, as to how juvenile and corrupt both are. And Brian Williams is a mental dwarf compared to him.

    Hillary 2016

  35. Admin, thank you for taking the time to further explain this particular blog entry. I understand much better now the thought process.

  36. If you haven’t seen this yet, here is Obama’s West Point so-called commencement speech. As always, it is overly long, overly naive, overly partisan and overly boring….BUT.

    It is worth watching to see his growing frustration as he spews lines his HuffPo crowd would be wildy cheering with tears in their eyes now being met with silence. Total silence. The few times there was applause would be called civilized applause by the charitable and a chilly applause by any realist.

    He totally tanked this speech, gave it to the wrong crowd and sounds so naive in so many spots.

  37. More laughs at the expense of the Obama cult called Google – now exposed as do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do racists:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/05/28/google-releases-employee-diversity-figures/9697049/

    Eighty-three percent of Google’s tech workers internationally are male. For non-tech jobs, the number is 52%. Its leadership is made of up 79% men.

    In terms of racial diversity, the company overall is 61% white, 30% Asian, 3% Hispanic and 2% Black.

    For tech positions, the numbers are similar—60% white, 34% Asian, 2% Hispanic and 1% Black.

    In terms of leadership, the company skews more white. Seventy-two percent of its leaders are white, 23% Asian, 2% Black and 1% Hispanic.

  38. Here’s Foreign Policy’s ‘Situation Report’ today with some news on the periphery of Benghazi:

    This morning, Obama will use his West Point commencement address to launch a new foreign policy offensive. FP’s John Hudson: “Under fire from the left and the right for its handling of foreign policy, the Obama administration is about to go on the attack with a high-profile speech at West Point designed to show that it has plans in place to deal with Islamist militants in Afghanistan, Syria, and Africa.”The speech Wednesday is unlikely to satisfy hawks in Congress who have pressed the White House to send more weaponry to Syria’s beleaguered rebels, provide more military assistance to Ukraine during its standoff with Russia, and leave a larger troop presence in Afghanistan to help prevent an al Qaeda resurgence there. But the new initiatives, which rely heavily on training forces in partner nations, may serve to combat the critique that the White House is doing nothing as the world smolders.”One of the most significant announcements, expected to be delivered on Wednesday, is a new military program to train and equip moderate elements of the Syrian opposition…

    {IMO, this might defuse the upcoming storm over why Chris Stevens was in Benghazi…}

    “…But that’s not the only initiative the administration is rolling out for reporters ahead of the speech. In North and West Africa, the U.S. is sending Special Forces troops to train elite counterterrorism units in Libya, Niger, Mauritania and Mali. The hope is to establish in-country units that can deal with terror threats, such as the one posed by the Islamist extremist group Boko Haram, which kidnapped almost 300 Nigerian girls last month. The African fighters will be trained by members of the Army’s Green Berets and Delta Force and financed by a classified Pentagon account, according to The New York Times. Overall, the initiative is in line with the president’s goal of avoiding costly land wars in favor of training allies to develop their own counterterrorism capabilities.”

    “The devil’s in the details”: The White House is close to authorizing a military training program for Syrian rebels. The WSJ’s Adam Entous: “…A new military training program, if implemented, would supplement a small train-and-equip program led by the Central Intelligence Agency that Mr. Obama authorized a year ago. U.S. officials don’t discuss the CIA’s limited training program because it is covert. {Again, this might defuse Stevens’ trip to Benghazi} In a commencement address at the United States Military Academy at West Point on Wednesday, officials said Mr. Obama will signal backing for the new training effort by saying he intends to increase support to the armed opposition to fight the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, including by providing them with training. Mr. Obama isn’t expected to provide details about how, or where, that training would be done.

    “… Defense officials said it was unclear when training, which would be undertaken by U.S. special-operations forces, would start. They cited obstacles that include how the Pentagon will vet prospective rebels for the program. Syrian opposition leaders say the program would be a step in the right direction but voiced skepticism that training alone could turn the tide in the civil war. Opposition leaders have been lobbying the U.S. to give moderate fighters access to more powerful weapons, including antiaircraft missile launchers, so they can take out Mr. Assad’s helicopters and attack planes.

    “Defense officials said it also remains unclear which countries in the region would agree to host such a mission and what criteria would be used to screen rebels to prevent radical Islamists aligned with al Qaeda from taking part.

    A senior U.S. military official: “The devil’s in the details… a lot of conditions have to be met.”

    The president’s biggest foreign-policy speech in a year will be showy and ambitious but can’t paper over his administration’s lack of focus says Stephen Walt. Harvard’s Walt for FP: “President Obama will give the commencement address at West Point tomorrow morning. I don’t know what he is going to say, of course, but I’m sure he’ll say it well.”…No doubt the speech will offer up the usual list of ‘achievements’ (Osama bin Laden is dead, we’re out of Iraq, etc.), and rumor has it that he’s going to announce a new program of assistance for the Syrian opposition. Given the setting, it is bound to strike a patriotic tone and contain some typically soaring Obamian rhetoric. But what the president really needs to do is provide the strategic coherence that has been lacking ever since he took office in 2009. Although he seems to have recognized from the start that the United States had to reduce its global burdens in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, neither Obama nor his advisors ever managed to articulate and stick to a set of core strategic principles. The result has been an overly ambitious foreign-policy agenda that kept top officials busy but failed to produce significant positive results.”

  39. admin May 28, 2014 at 11:00 am

    She stood with Hillary in 2008. Now Maya Angelou is dead at 86.
    *****

    Very sad… Strange premonition, but I was just thinking of her the other day, trying to remember her last name (I found it by looking up “Maya” in Wikipedia). She also appeared at WJC’s inauguration, i.e., the inauguration of the first black president.

  40. jeswezey
    May 29, 2014 at 3:17 am
    —————
    That is a stretch. The Seymore Hirsh explanation makes more sense. And the alternative foreign policy described above. It is a CIA led approach, which people who value transparency, checks and balances and no day of the condor recoil at. And, worst of all, it is failing around the world. The point is, this is Obama’s policy and its failure is attributable to him. When we get in bed with our enemies, we do worse than wake up with fleas. It is insanity. It is doctrinal stupidity, and should make everyone who values freedom nervous. In one of his essays Judge Learned Hand addressed the question of whether we needed to abandon civil liberties and sink to the level of our enemies in order to survive in a dangerous world. Obama and Bush before him said yes. Learned Hand answered no. I find his answer to be more satisfying and hopeful. I think I am in good company because Glenn Greenwald and Sharyl Atkisson agree with me and that simian David Gregory supports government surveillance, covert operations etc.

  41. Put differently, Brennan is a bad dude. I have that on reputable authority. And if that is the case, we should fear a foreign policy which places someone like him at the helm, under a commander in chief who is consistently MIA.

  42. Are we all racist now?
    As a survey of British social attitudes reveals a shocking upturn in prejudice, Allison Pearson argues that the political elite’s desire to advance multiculturalism with mass immigration has backfired
    snip And what vile abuse had my poor mother bandied about? She had asked her grandson if his choir sang Negro spirituals.snip It is more likely to be because women in labour are often turned away by one of the region’s major maternity units, which has several times actually locked its doors, so difficult does it find a soaring, immigrant-driven birth rate.snip
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10860492/Are-we-all-racist-now.html

  43. I was thrilled to see the front page picture produced by the White House and inserted on the front page of the New York Times and other organs of big media of Obama, marching with such determination and purpose, while the West Point cadets stood at attention and snapped off their snappy salutes to their commander and chief, the great Obama, who reminds me of the Pink Panther. Surprisingly however, this turned out to be yet another staged picture, a stunt, a Potemkin Village tale of a man who is so timid when faced with a real crisis, that he leads from behind and hides under the bed. Before the nations future military leaders, he delivered a speech which sought to justify his incoherent approach to foreign policy, to answer his critics, and to lay out his programmatic strategy for retreat–a regressive, as opposed to a progressive in that area. He is following the Soros playbook, and mouthing his very words, thus confirming what I have said all along. He takes his marching orders from the old Nazi who is committed to ensuring the rise of China and the demise of the United States, and I have, someplace, the direct quote by Soros. Thus it is hardly surprising that at the conclusion of that speech, which left big media in their familiar pink haze comparing it to the funeral oration of Pericles, his words failed to elicit a similar response from the corp of cadets. Indeed, I am told that when it came to applause from them, the silence was deafening. Unlike big media, they find it hard to applaud the words and actions of a traitor.

  44. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/montel-williams-goes-on-fiery-rant-over-va-why-didnt-obama-apologize/

    Montel Williams Goes on Fiery Rant over VA: Why Didn’t Obama Apologize?!

    Talk show host Montel Williams is an American veteran, and he is particularly incensed about the scandal over veteran deaths as a result of secret waiting lists. Moreover, he was bothered by how President Obama was at West Point, yet didn’t take a moment to apologize for how his administration has dropped ball on veterans’ health.

    Williams told Neil Cavuto that giving Secretary Shinseki the boot won’t really fix much. He said soldiers left the battlefield abroad only to come back to another battlefield at home, saying he is “angry” as hell because “our guys went over, they’ve left body parts, some of them never made it back, some of them are here now but their souls are still there, and we have the audacity to turn our back on them right this second.”

    As for Obama’s West Point speech, Williams bewilderedly said, “The president just promised five billion dollars for terrorists around the world at West Point?! Where he could have used the day to say, ‘I’m sorry for the pain that I’ve caused you, the families, and I’m gonna fix it today!’”

    He called for a “VA surge” to help these veterans, and had some tough words for the nation on how it’s gradually forgotten about veterans over the years. “Be as tired as you want,” Williams said, “but that barbecue you had on Sunday was paid for on the backs of soldiers who left body parts in the battlefield. So you have no right to forget!”

    Video at link.

  45. The Snowflake president, not worthy of attention:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/obama-foreign-policy-speech-west-point-criticized-new-york-times-wall-street-journal-washington-post-107209.html?hp=t3_3

    Editorial boards at three major U.S. newspapers are criticizing President Barack Obama’s foreign policy speech at West Point on Wednesday as incomplete and failing to recognize America’s international standing.

    The New York Times editorial board, often supportive of the White House, wrote that his address “did not match the hype, was largely uninspiring, lacked strategic sweep and is unlikely to quiet his detractors, on the right or the left.”

    Obama “provided little new insight into how he plans to lead in the next two years,” the Times wrote, “and many still doubt that he fully appreciates the leverage the United States has even in a changing world.”

    The Times also continued its criticism of Obama on transparency on targeted killings and intelligence, saying his call for more transparency was “ludicrous” given the administration’s unwillingness to give “even minimal disclosures.

    The Wall Street Journal, far more accustomed to criticizing the president on foreign policy, said Obama’s speech was marked less by what he said and more by what he left out — the pivot to Asia, relations with Russia, a defense of the administration’s Syria policy, a discussion of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and other issues.

    “We know that no foreign policy speech can cover the entire world,” the Journal concluded. “But listening to Mr. Obama trying to assemble a coherent foreign policy agenda from the record of the past five years was like watching Tom Hanks trying to survive in ‘Cast Away’: Whatever’s left from the wreckage will have to do.”

    The Washington Post editorial said the president’s “binding of U.S. power places Mr. Obama at odds with every U.S. president since World War II.”

    “President Obama has retrenched U.S. global engagement in a way that has shaken the confidence of many U.S. allies and encouraged some adversaries,” the board said, attacking the president for resorting to rhetoric instead of adjusting policy.

    The Post also said that Obama provided “scant comfort” to those concerned about his policies on Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Ukraine.

    All these Big Media Obama supporters are moving to our view of Barack Obama. The Snowflake president is melting.

  46. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/05/28/americans-overwhelmingly-side-with-hillary-clinton-over-karl-rove-in-brain-flap/

    Two-thirds of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll disapprove of the Republican strategist raising questions about Clinton’s age and health in advance of her potential presidential run. The lopsided negative reaction to Rove’s commentary — just 26 percent approve of his topic of criticism — includes majorities of every age group as well as Democrats and independents. Republicans split evenly on the issue, with 45 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving of Rove broaching the issue. [snip]

    Rove’s line of criticism faces skepticism, according to the new poll. Big majorities of nearly all demographic and political groups disapprove of Rove’s focus, including men and senior citizens, two groups that the GOP needs in a general election. Only among the subset of conservative Republicans do a majority (52 percent) approve of what Rove said. Even among those who would oppose Hillary Clinton as a candidate in 2016, nearly half disapprove Rove’s commentary.

  47. This utterly delights us:

    http://www.deadline.com/2014/05/fox-news-channels-bret-baier-greta-van-susteren-land-hillary-clinton-interview-on-june-17/

    Fox News Channel said today that Bret Baier and Greta Van Susteren will conduct a joint half-hour interview with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on June 17, spanning the two anchors’ respective programs.

    It will begin on Special Report at about 6:45 PM ET and continue during On The Record until 7:15 PM. The interview will cover an array of topics, including the 2016 presidential election, the 2012 attacks in Benghazi and Clinton’s new book, Hard Choices. Van Susteren most recently interviewed Clinton in January 2013.

    We expect a tough, fair, and balanced, interview.

  48. Actions do have consequences!!! :evil
    Found this comment to ponder on. 😡

    Reply 39 – Posted by: afherkdriver, 5/29/2014 1:56:33 AM (No. 9865366)

    He is doing his level best to destroy the military. Bit by bit
    “The Burger King national headquarters announced this month that they will be pulling their franchises from our military bases. Soon to follow will be Popeye´s Chicken, Pizza franchises and the chain of barber and beauty shops which operates inside the gates of our military facilities. Reason? Obama´s mandate that all companies who do business with the federal government pay a $10.10 per hour minimum wage.”

  49. Hot Air this morning expressing surprise that NYT and WashPo have given a critical account of the Peraclean Speech by their Messiah at West Point. I say, who put him in a position where he could demonstrate his incompetence? The answer is big media in general, and those two useless rags in particular. Even if they decided, for their own survival apres le deluge, to switch gears and function more like journalist, assuming they are able to make that leap from what they are now, I would return to the original point and say this: they are whores. They are not to be believed. And even if they change their tune, after what they put this nation through in 2008 and 2012, why in god’s green earth would a reasonable person ever give these whores a third bite at the apple? Their influence over the political system is not only unhealthy, it is suicidal for the nation. Which means that, to me, whatever they say about Obama, is utterly immaterial. Twice they gave him a pass, and allowed him to wreck this nation.

  50. John Boehner blames Obama for problems at Veterans Affairs hospitals, spares Eric Shinseki
    ——————
    Obviously, he is reading this blog. |

  51. Meanwhile, with new scandals emerging by the weak, Obama is like the bon vivante French General Navarre at the battle of Diem ben Phu in 1954, ignoring the facts on the ground, and living the good life of delusion.

  52. admin
    May 29, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    This utterly delights us:

    ——-
    That’s awesome!

    I hope I can remember to get home from work quickly that day.

  53. Has there ever been a president in the history of America who knew less than President Obama?

    With each new crisis and scandal, Mr. Obama tells Americans that he just didn’t know.

    He didn’t know the Veterans Administration was letting America’s veterans languish and die unattended — he learned about it in the newspaper.

    He didn’t know the Justice Department was trolling phone records of members of the U.S. media. He didn’t know the ATF was running guns into Mexico; didn’t know the NSA was spying on the German chancellor; didn’t know the Obamacare website was a disaster; didn’t know the IRS was targeting conservative groups.

    With every scandal, the president — the CEO of the United States, if you will — said he first learned about it in the papers. If he were head of Apple or IBM, he’d have been fired years ago, because in business, it’s your job to know, and ignorance is, frankly, even worse than failing. Fail = fired

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/21/curl-obama-unaccountable-president/#ixzz338r5aVC0
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

  54. So is he admitting that he is disabled and cannot perform the functions of the office of the president?

  55. Hey there Admin, could you please change the video at 11:55 am to not self-play every time we refresh? Thanks mucho.

    ———-
    …ringing in my ears.

    I wondered what that was, every time I hear Barry’s voice on TV.

    Little concussions, little throw-ups, big boredom, bigger annoyance.

  56. TheRock

    I don’t know, since Hillary is the popular one and he is the weak, bumbler…my guess is he wants her help to:

    1- Cover his ass in the Benghazi hearings…Bill got his legal eagles to look over some emails Hillary received…remember that?

    2- Campaign for Dimocrats that may lose in the election

    3- Talk Bill into more Clinton magic

    4- Ask her advice on how to fix, A though Z of his screw ups

    I hope she give him the Hillary laugh, a friendly nod, and watches him twist in the wind.

  57. admin
    May 29, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    I hope so Admin, Hillary needs to come clean on Benghazi, but I don’t think she will. I am afraid she will protect the fraud. Doesn’t want the left to seriously full throttle her like last time.

    Her book, somewhat of a disappointment.

    Time to separate…will she do it?

    She is amazing that she will go to the tiger. Yes, Greta will be friendly, but I don’t think she will give a fluff O’Reilly interview with the clown. Bret, I think he may probe deeper.

  58. Good round-up of views (WaPo) of the economy under WJC, to which the Democratic left is beginning to take exception now, and how HRC is going to have to come up with something smart on the subject of economic inequality:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-has-a-new-problem-on-the-left–the-legacy-of-the-1990s-economy/2014/05/29/90527b94-db92-11e3-b745-87d39690c5c0_story.html

    In the video at that link, HRC says she will “leave [that debate] to others this year.” Ominous… maybe she won’t be campaigning.

  59. Uhhh.. Hillary on Political…apparently in her new book is still voicing the video as possibly responsible and Republicans using Bengahzi as a political ploy. She actually name NYT as a resource.

    Jesus.

  60. I think that every one running for POTUS and VPOTUS should be required to show their Pedigree or at least a valid birth certificate to get on the ballot.
    What does Admin and our pinkers think? 🙂

  61. …listenting to Shinseki’s plans for what needs to be done at VA:

    re: taking away all performance bonuses related to the “numbers” of vets getting health care…that frankly seems to be the root cause of much of the corruption at the VA hospitals…administrators enriching themselves by cooking the books while vets suffer and die…

    we need some brave, truthful dems/repubs to come forward and link that to Ocare…there are very similar “performance bonuses” in Ocare for doctors, hospital, etc for ‘limiting care and hospital visits’ for people…

    via Ocare, the health providers/doctors are incentivized and rewarded for discouraging revists and continuing care at hospitals, etc…less care for patients means more money and bonuses for administrators…in Ocare…same gaming of the system…

    …this is another ticking timebomb in Ocare put in place to eventually explode…now would be the time for some reporter and/or politician to connect all the dots and expose what O care is bringing and the doors to corruption it is opening…just as it did at the VA

    Awaiting the mandated American taxpayer is a system set up for Administrators and a scheme to unhatch for their own personal enrichment at the expense of people who pay and are MANDATED TO PAY for their healthcare but will be discouraged and denied visits and treatments so some administrator can cook their books and get fat bonuses for themselves…

    We are all watching the results from these kind of policies at the VA…why would we force the whole country and all its citizens to be exposed to the same destructive, deceptive and corruptible policies…

    …someone with a high profile and power needs to connect the dots in a coherent and explicit way and make abundantly clear that the VA is about to be repeated upon the American taxpayers via Ocare…

    …and I would love to hear some reporter directly ask O how he can assure the American people that with the Ocare ‘incentivized performance bonus plans’ how can O be sure the American people won’t be abused in the same way the Vets have been?

  62. gonzotx May 30, 2014 at 9:08 am

    Hillary… apparently in her new book is still voicing the video as possibly responsible and Republicans using Bengahzi as a political ploy. She actually name NYT as a resource.

    The Benghazi chapter is not out yet and, as nick Merrill states, “… once it’s released, it will speak for itself.”

    What she has said is:

    Her tone is less defensive than defiant: Clinton takes responsibility for the “horror” of the loss of life in Benghazi, but puts it in the context of “the heartbreaking human stakes of every decision we make” — and she accuses adversaries of manipulating a tragedy for partisan gain.

    “Many of these same people are a broken record about unanswered questions. But there is a difference between unanswered questions and unlistened to answers.

    “There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives,” she writes. “It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video. It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were. Both assertions defy not only the evidence but logic as well.”

    Clinton addresses lingering questions about how military assets were deployed to try to rescue personnel at the besieged compound, writing that Obama “gave the order to do whatever was necessary to support our people in Libya. It was imperative that all possible resources be mobilized immediately. … When Americans are under fire, that is not an order the Commander in Chief has to give twice. Our military does everything humanly possible to save American lives — and would do more if they could. That anyone has ever suggested otherwise is something I will never understand.”

    You’re so needy of the ‘truth’ but don’t seem to understand that the truth will never coincide with your simplistic suspicions and superficial criteria. HRC already accepted responsibility at the time and insists on doing so now, but you won’t give her a chance. Great gods! She cites the NYT?

    In the meantime, HRC ‘accuses’ adversaries of using the story for political gain, and I agree with her fully on that score.

  63. In his news conference today, President Obama suggested that a/the problem with the VA situation was due to old computers. HUH?
    In that case they better get those things updated and fixed. Look what those vile computers did to mess up the Obamacare roll out.

    So the computers forced Shinseki to fall on his sword?

  64. foxyladi14 May 30, 2014 at 10:29 am

    I think that every one running for POTUS and VPOTUS should be required to show their Pedigree or at least a valid birth certificate to get on the ballot.
    What does Admin and our pinkers think?

    As the law stands now, I think what you suggest is the least we could do. And I supported the effort to demand full proof from Obama that he was born in the US.

    However, I think the law should be changed – thrown out, in fact. It has long outlived its time. It was originally conceived to prevent Alexander Hamilton from becoming president. He was considered to be an English sympathizer (born in the West Indies) and strongly Federalist. A lot of people who wanted a peaceful, neutral nation, were scared of his “Federalism” and considered him foreign as well. At the time, we also had to define what “American” meant, as everyone (even native-born) had recently been English.

    But that was a long time ago. Now, I think the people can decide for themselves. No other country I know of has such a rule. People who sound too foreign are excluded by the people from high office, but people who fit the culture can run for high office no matter where they were born. I think we’re mature enough to do it that way too: let the people decide.

  65. Shineski resigms!!
    ———————–
    Big media begs Barack for a speech and he does not disappoint (them):

    Barack: General S agrees with me that Bush was no good, therefore he is a patriot. He told Bush you cannot fight wars on the cheap, and has never accused me of trying to do the same thing, through my alternate approach to foreign policy. Therefore, I wish to thank General S from the bottom of my heart for his selfless service to the nation as head of the Veterans Affairs. Previously, I extended the same salutation to Lois Learner, and to Katheleen Sebilius. I will not tolerate incompetence, it makes me maaad, but I am also brilliant enough to realize that no system is perfect. Therefore I will not allow anyone to judge him harshly just because he let wounded warriors who needed help simply perish. I will use the full powers of my office to prevent anyone from accusing him of what he is, outside my Potemkin Village, i.e. an incompetent bureaucrat. And most certain of all, I cannot be held responsible for those deaths, because I am a messiah and have more pressing matters to attend to, like golf.

    (Thunderous applause from big media.)

  66. Shineski resigms!!
    —————-
    And Barack defrocked him in private. Just like in the clip below. Yes, Barack is a fine commander in chief.

    Only one problem:

    Barack does not give a rat’s ass about the vets.

    The icy response he received to his glorious speech on the plains of West Point were one indication.

    Why did he not just cut to the chase and say something like:

    Since I took the oath at west point the world has turned over many times. But I still recall the words of a dark ballad of the day, that Messiahs like me do not expire and do not go away. And so when I cross that river, my thoughts will be about me, me, me, me, me, me–not not Mimi Rogers, not Mimi Farrel, me–Barack Hussein Obama, narcissist for all seasons.

    Well, as bad as he is, Barack is at least predictable. All he ever obsesses about is his carefully cultivated media image. And general S became a direct threat to that image. Therefore he need to go. Not for the good of the vets, not for the good of the country, but for the good of Obama. And big media can now return to embracing him.

  67. Too bad that carney has resigned. If the were still there we could wait for him to say something profound like–Oh, the veterans department scandal . . . I almost forgot . . . that happened a long time ago—meaning yesterday.

  68. Commin thick and fast now.
    Clown Carney is leaving as press secretary he will be replaced by Josh Earnest another Obama mouth piece!!! 😯

  69. Jeswezey

    Simplistic I may be, but retreading the ridiculous video theory and claiming witch hunt is not going to help her cause.
    Obviously politics play into this. Duh! But 4 Americans died that day, including an American Ambassador, and a decision not to help them was made . Clearly we know the real criminal is the fraud, but dying on her sword in my simplistic mind, is not the course of action.

  70. Obama Stumbles Through Surprise Shinseki Question on Live with Kelly and Michael [Strahan]
    Snip (How do we know it was a “surprise” question? Well, the other teaser videos released are titled: “President Obama talks about his Gray Hair” and “President Obama talks about Malia’s Prom,” and he’s on a fluffy daytime talk show, so… we’re just going to guess here.)
    It takes two-and-a-half minutes for Obama to actually answer the question, and one can actually watch him try to cobble together a coherent statement about what he’s going to do with Shinseki. Somewhere, you can actually watch him desperately wish that Kelly Ripa asked him to hold a tiger.
    And then Obama got Eric Shinseki to resign this morning, so we guess it worked. So by extension, Michael Strahan helped solve America. Whoda thunk?!
    [Video here]
    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/obama-stumbles-through-surprise-shinseki-question-on-live-with-kelly-and-michael/

  71. Then from Huff & Puff:
    “Good Morning America” confirmed Tuesday that Michael Strahan will be joining the show.
    Strahan made a quick visit to the set to announce his role as the show’s new part-time correspondent. Tuesday’s show confirmed earlier reports that he was slated to join “GMA” part-time while continuing to host “Live!”, which Strahan himself had alluded to on “Live!” earlier this month.
    This could be a good thing. Watch him on video referenced above – during his “Live” show putting Oh on spot:

  72. Obama Goes to West Point and Proves He’s a Moron
    By Larry Johnson on May 29, 2014 at 5:55 PM in Current Affairs
    Barack Obama, during a two minute portion of his speech to the graduates of West Point yesterday, demonstrated once and for all that he is a silly, immature, irrelevant buffoon. He focused part of his speech on insisting that the soon to be newly minted second lieutenants will be on the front lines of the war of climate change:

    This was a truly jaw-dropping, mind numbing performance. Does this ass clown not understand that the cadets at West Point are not social workers. They did not earn degrees in Community Development or Community Organizing. They are soldiers and their skill is supposed to be fighting and winning wars.

    That crowd of mostly young men (there were a few women sprinkled in, but the work of war is still largely a male occupation) probably assumed that Obama had been hitting the choom before walking on stage to spill his nonsense. It is alarming that the ostensible Commander-in-Chief does not understand the nature and purpose of the Army.

    Take a closer look at what he said:

    “That spirit of cooperation,” Obama said, “needs to energize the global effort to combat climate change–a creeping national security crisis that will help shape your time in uniform, as we are called on to respond to refugee flows and natural disasters and conflicts over water and food, which is why next year I intend to make sure America is out front in putting together a global framework to preserve our planet.

    “You see, American influence is always stronger when we lead by example,” Obama said. “We can’t exempt ourselves from the rules that apply to everybody else. We can’t call on others to make commitments to combat climate change if a whole lot of our political leaders deny that it’s taking place.”

    Combat “global climate change?” You have got to be shitting me. What next? The war on sunrise and sunset? The war on preventing the moon from orbiting the earth?

  73. Josh Earnest
    ———–
    So when he starts giving out the Obama bullshit, big media can do color stories about him, that those who do not swallow it can say, no he is not bullshitting, he is just joshing, as only he can.

  74. Foxy,

    I agree, and not these fake birth certificates! Not having a true American has caused great damage to this country. The founding fathers understood what a split allegiance would do and we see the disastrous results today.

Comments are closed.