Two Smart Moves By The GOP

Update II: You can stop laughing now. “Red line” Obama has made his move. Unable to decide on whom to stab in the back, Barack Obama will stab everyone in the back – friend and foe alike. You know our first rule on Obama:

Obama cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his foes. Obama cannot be trusted.

This morning there was news breaking: Obama to delay immigration action until voters can’t punish Democrats for it. Obama in this one action stabs everyone in the back.

Obama Dimocrats running for office will still have to answer for their support of Barack Obama as he burns the Constitution on the altar of illegal immigration amnesty politics. Their acts as co-conspirators who support diktat Obama will heighten as an issue because Obama says he will still violate the Constitution after the election and they will continue to support Obama.

The American public opposed to illegal immigration amnesty has been stabbed in the back too and will not be fooled by Obama’s attempt to hide from accountability for his actions and the actions of Obama Dimocrats. The illegal immigration amnesty “dreamers” have a knife in their backs too:

Obama’s decision abandons a pledge he made June 30 to act quickly after summer’s end, and it prompted an immediate and furious backlash from immigration advocates. [snip]

Cristina Jimenez, managing director of United We Dream, said the decision was “another slap to the face of the Latino and immigrant community.”

“Where we have demanded leadership and courage from both Democrats and the president, we’ve received nothing but broken promises and a lack of political backbone,” she said.

Hey “dreamers” when you tongue kiss a snake don’t be surprised if you get a poison bite. Wake up “dreamers” Obama cannot be trusted by foe nor friend:

“But Dreamers will not soon forget the president and Democrats’s latest failure and their attempts to fool the Latino community, and we remain resolute in fighting for justice for our families,” Jimenez added. [snip]

“We advocates didn’t make the reform promise; we just made the mistake of believing it,” Sharry said. “The President and Senate Democrats have chosen politics over people; the status quo over solving real problems.”

“It is hard to believe this litany of high expectations and broken promises will be mended by the end of the year,” he said.

Adding onto what could be viewed as calls to mobilize against Democrats during a crucial election year, Sharry said “the stakes have only been raised; so is our determination.”

Arturo Carmona, director of Presente.org, an online Latino organizing group, called the delay a “betrayal” and one of the “single biggest attacks on Latino families by the Democratic Party in recent memory.”

“Treachery” and “Obama” are two words you will often find in the same sentence.

[Thanks again to PowerLine for selection of our well timed article as a “pick”.]

———————————————————

Update: GOP hopes this November brighten now that we have more Obama: I’ll be making an announcement on amnesty “soon”.

Barack will violate the Constitution and that is criminal enough. But the Obama Dimocrats who want Obama to wait to make his unconstitutional diktat after the November elections in order to spare them from the wrath of the voters are even worse. Senator Jeff Sessions has it right:

“The only thing that is more shocking than Senate Democrats’ support for the President’s planned executive amnesty is the cravenness of asking him to proceed beginning the day after the midterms. Once again, powerful politicians are colluding with powerful interest groups to deny you, the American citizen, the protection of your laws and your voice in government. They don’t care what you want, or what you think—they scorn and mock our good and decent citizens for wishing their laws to be enforced.”

———————————————————

It’s not very often a sentence includes “GOP” and “smart” in it.

Like careless mountain climbers twisting in the wind after a slip, with only a slight grip on a few loose roots of dead vegetation to halt the fall into the abyss, Obama Dimocrats are down to race-baiting on immigration and the gender-baiting War On Women act to rescue them this November. But the GOP has a smart ax to chop hands off and hurtle Obama Dimocrats to a blood splattered end.

Obama Dimocrats gender-baiting on the Hobby Lobby court ruling with distortions about how that is an assault on the right of women to contraception was to be THE prime tool to woo daffy young single women back into the Dim ranks of voters this November. But oddly, and it comes as a shock to all, Republicans came up with a very effective response.

It’s like lobbing a mortar explosive into the enemy camp ammunition dump. The ammunition dump explodes. The massive ammunition dump explosion kills those in the camp. The camp is destroyed. What is left of the enemy army finds itself without ammunition to fight. The GOP has Cory Gardner of Colorado to thank for the direct hit with his mortar on the ammunition dump in the War On Women:

Republicans want to beat Democrats at their own game this November by proposing a new way to widen access to birth control.

GOP candidates around the country are saying they want to make the pill available over the counter without a doctor’s prescription for the first time since it was approved in 1960.

The party hopes its stance, widely shared by healthcare providers, will help neutralize tough debates over birth control coverage and cut into Democrats’ traditional advantage among women voters.

Cory’s proposal puts women in control,” said Alex Siciliano, spokesman for Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), the first 2014 Senate candidate to talk up the idea.

Making oral contraception available to adults at every pharmacy, without the trouble of a doctor’s visit, would drop the retail price and save money and time and hassle,” Siciliano said in a statement.

Obama Dimocrats are aghast. ‘Make it easier to obtain cheaper birth control’ that must be racist or something, they seem to say. They say its a “distraction” from the War on Women which they thought was the path for them to avoid destruction this November.

Cory Gardner blew up the ammunition dump and other Republicans are following his cue. Ed Gillespie running for Senate in Virginia and Mike McFadden running for Senate in Minnesota have endorsed Gardner’s plan. On Wednesday night’s North Carolina senate debate Republican Thom Tillis also approved of the plan:

Appearing more confident and prepared than the incumbent, Tillis became the latest Republican Senate candidate to come out in support of expanding access to oral contraceptives. In a race with a wide gender gap, the state House speaker — who has been defending attacks from Democrats on women’s issues — for the first time went on the offense.

“First I believe contraception should be available — and probably more broadly than it is today,” Tillis said. “I actually agree with the American Medical Association that we should make contraception more widely available. I think over-the-counter oral contraception should be available without a prescription. If you do those kinds of things you will actually increase the access and reduce the barriers for having more options for women for contraception.”

It’s good policy and effective politics. This is how Cory Gardner defended his plan in the Denver Post:

When treatments go over-the-counter, two things happen: they get dramatically cheaper and consumers save time and hassle by avoiding unnecessary doctors’ appointments just to get the pharmaceuticals they already know they need.

Fewer unneeded doctors’ appointments mean fewer missed workdays and child-care expenses, more productivity and more time with family. This is particularly true for rural families like mine where doctors are not always nearby.

Women in my hometown of Yuma drive one hour to see their obstetrician/gynecologist in Fort Morgan, even if it’s just to get a prescription renewed. With over 50,000 pharmacies in America and no appointment required, the increase in convenience and access would aid every adult woman who uses oral contraceptives, whether it’s the first time they get them or when they run out and need a refill far from home.

The inevitable cost savings from a switch to OTC status should not be underestimated. Almost all therapies that move to OTC drop in price dramatically. Many insurers and state Medicaid programs have covered common OTC therapies for this economic reason. For those without coverage, these OTC costs are usually cheaper than a co-pay for a prescription drug.

Since January 2011, an obscure provision of Obamacare has blocked insurers from covering OTC medicine without a prescription. If Democrats are serious about making oral contraception affordable and accessible, we can reverse that technical provision.

Driving the price down for a safe medicine is a better way to provide access to adults who want it than President Obama’s insurance mandate. Many women don’t have access today in spite of the Obamacare mandate, and it violates religious liberty in the process. If a new generation of senators puts partisanship aside, we can protect the liberties of women to have easy access to affordable oral contraception at the same time we protect the rights of those with conscience objections.

In his article Cory Gardner cited support in 2012 for the idea from a committee of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. So why hasn’t this good idea happened?:

Since it makes so much sense, you might wonder why this change has not happened yet. It’s because too many people in Washington would rather play politics with contraception instead of actually making life easier for women. Too many Democrats prefer to attack Republicans on the issue of contraception rather than actually make contraception more available and affordable and too many Republicans are afraid to break the mold.

So why hasn’t this happened? For his political profit Barack Obama is waging a War On Women.

Likewise, for his political profit Barack Obama is race-baiting on immigration reform.

Barack Obama promised to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” in 2008. In 2009 the promise turned out to be another Hope and Change lie. Obama had total control of the congress back when he promised to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” in 2010. That was another broken promise. Ditto 2011. Ditto 2012. Ditto 2013. Now it is 2014 and the plan was to dupe Latino voters again. But Republicans accidentally fell headfirst into a smart strategy.

We were the first to proclaim the death of immigration reform of any sort on the day of the Boston Marathon bombing. There were doubts about how correct we were. Then Eric Cantor went down in flames and even the dullest Republican could see that a vote for illegal immigration amnesty would end their careers in congress.

Barack Obama threatened. If the congress would not bow to his imperious demands then Obama threatened to act on his own. Barack Obama threatened and threatened some more. Republicans quivered in fear but fear also prevented them from moving forward with amnesty. Obama threatened again. Increasingly Republicans lost their fear and stood their ground.

Barack Obama threatened again. He would act alone like an imperial personage in a backwater country. Republicans began to quiver less and less and wonder why Obama was threatening so much and doing so little. Then came the flood of border crossing children goaded to come by Obama and his allies and the public began to take notice of what was happening at the border.

We wondered, Why Won’t Republicans Use The Illegal Immigration Crisis As A Wedge Issue And Speak To Black Americans? Black Americans took notice anyway. Obama continued to threaten but with less conviction.

Then Scott Brown began his assault in New Hampshire using illegal immigration amnesty as his cudgel and saw his poll numbers dramatically improve. Obama’s threats continued but with less and less believability.

Barack Obama’s threats became a hole he dug for himself. Barack Obama thought that he could bully Republicans into doing what he demanded. But then Republicans saw that this was a case of MISERY LOVES COMPANY. Republicans smartly refused to provide company to the miserable Obama.

Obama Dimocrats meanwhile began to panic and fear for themselves. The calls from those running for election in November for the senate solidified into opposition to Obama’s imperial presidency diktats on immigration amnesty.

Instead of leading the charge, Barack Obama turned himself into the butt of jokes. Barack Obama is in full retreat. The first to trumpet the retreat was the whore in the whorehouse called Greg Sargent whose reports were confirmed by the L.A. Times:

Morning Plum: Why top Dems are worried about politics of deportations

The Los Angeles Times reports this morning that the White House is considering whether to postpone Obama’s politically explosive executive action to defer deportations until after the elections. This would “bow to the concerns of Democratic lawmakers running in Republican-leaning states who have expressed opposition to Obama’s plans to act unilaterally on the hot-button issue.”

I’m not sure how seriously to take this. But it does seem likely that Dems will mount internal pressure on the White House to hold off as the elections heat up.

So it’s worth detailing why, exactly, Dems worry that Obama acting could make a GOP Senate takeover more likely. The conversations going on among high level Dems, as I understand them, focus not just on worries that Republicans would seize on any act of Obummer Lawlessness to argue that Dem Senators are powerless to halt the Obama agenda and that a GOP Senate is necessary as a check on it. They also focus on the peculiar makeup of this midterm electorate.

As Sargent pointed out, “Meanwhile, Dem hopes for survival rest heavily on turning out the unmarried women who are increasingly key to the Dem coalition but sit out midterms.” Well, that is not going so well either is it?

It is an Obama rerun of 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 for illegal immigration amnesty advocates:

“Expectations are sky high,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the immigration advocacy group America’s Voice, adding that if there is yet another delay to immigration reform, “the disappointment and anger is likely to be profound.”

Barack Obama dug the trap Barack Obama is in. If he does not dictate amnesty via an unconstitutional usurpation of congress “the disappointment and anger is likely to be profound” and turnout in November for Obama Dimocrats will be um, profound. It’s already damned bad.

If Barack Obama does imperiously dictate amnesty for illegal immigrants then the revulsion in the country will be justifiably reflected at the November ballot box. It’s a trap of Obama’s own making. Republicans were smart not to jump into the Obama trap. Obama is now at 38 percent: Obama ties his all-time low in Gallup’s daily tracker of job approval.

Obama is isolated. ObamaCare is despised by a majority. Putin and ISIS have stripped Barack Obama naked and the world is laughing at Obama and his little shriveled grapes.

It wasn’t that long ago (August 29, 2014) that Obama was (on immigration amnesty, not ISIS or Ukraine) “spoiling for a fight”:

The White House Is Spoiling for a Fight on Immigration
Obama seems determined to push ahead, despite the fears of some Democrats.

The White House appears to be moving full-speed ahead on an executive order that would provide widespread protection to illegal immigrants from deportation, Republicans—and maybe some Democrats—be damned.

Those close to the process expect an order in the first few weeks of September—and expect it, in the words of one immigration advocate, to be “significant.” [snip]

Yet the administration’s posture has been one of anticipating—even inviting—a highly public confrontation with Republicans over the issue. And while the concerns of vulnerable Senate Democrats in key races are being taken into account, they don’t seem to be persuading the White House to deviate from its course—suggesting that the matter is viewed less in terms of the politics of the moment and more in terms of President Obama’s long-term liberal legacy.

Have no doubt, in the absence of congressional action, I’m going to do what I can to make sure the system works better,” Obama told reporters at the White House on Thursday.

Even as the ultimate scope of the order remains unclear, Obama is in a position where he almost has to go big, because no matter what he does, it will be construed that way by the GOP. [snip]

Moreover, once it became clear that the House wasn’t going to act on the Senate bill, high-profile Senate leaders such as Chuck Schumer of New York called for Obama to act on his own. Schumer’s office said that he hasn’t shifted from that stance and has not asked the White House to delay the order until after the midterms.

Indeed, there’s a school of thought that if Obama waits until after the midterms to act, he may be doing so in advance of a Republican Senate that will dedicate itself to rolling back the order. Doing it now at least affords the possibility that the ensuing controversy will galvanize base voters and ward off a handover of the chamber to the GOP.

Unfortunately for Democratic incumbents, however, the map affords them very little opportunity to use the issue to drive Hispanic turnout. [snip]

Otherwise, it’s more than possible in states such as Arkansas, Michigan, New Hampshire, and North Carolina that Obama’s order will feed the Republican narrative of an out-of-control chief executive, perhaps serving as the wedge issue that puts the GOP candidates there over the top. The National Republican Senatorial Committee points to polls that show that a majority of independents who favor legislative reform oppose unilateral action.

Compounding the issue from a messaging standpoint is that Obama spent much of the first part of the year talking about how he lacked the power to make bold moves to reshape the nation’s immigration system. Those words will certainly be used against Obama and Democratic candidates in GOP campaigns.

That was August 29 when Obama was “spoiling for a fight”. Since then the New York Times reports the trumpet is blowing retreat, retreat, retreat. Politico hears the blare of “retreat” too.

It’s all a trap of Obama’s own making. All the high expectations created have been and will continue to be dashed. The Republicans by not being stupid got smart.

Share

153 thoughts on “Two Smart Moves By The GOP

  1. Yesterday’s “smart” moves by Obama Dimocrats turn out to be more stupidity:

    http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article1504835.html

    Democrat Chad Taylor must stay on the ballot for U.S. Senate in Kansas, Secretary of State Kris Kobach said Thursday afternoon.

    Kobach said Taylor submitted a letter Wednesday to withdraw from the race but did not declare he was incapable of serving, which is also required.

    The Kansas Republican Party had questioned whether Taylor, the Shawnee County district attorney, could withdraw. [snip]

    I’m done. I’m out. I’m withdrawn from the race. I’m not commenting on it,” Taylor had said Thursday morning.

    The sudden withdrawal had seemed to open a window for independent candidate Greg Orman to mount a serious challenge to Sen. Pat Roberts. Most polls have shown Roberts maintaining a lead with weak support with Orman and Taylor splitting the remainder of supporters. Libertarian Randall Batson has collected less than 5 percent of support in polls.

  2. The Dems are trying to pull this shit in Alaska and push Parnell out the doors……seems they did not bother reading the rules in Kansas, now they are left looking like prize idiots.

  3. Garry Kasparov to Obama:

    http://time.com/3227869/garry-kasparov-its-a-war-stupid/

    Garry Kasparov: It’s a War, Stupid!

    This vocabulary of cowardice emanating from Berlin and Washington is as disgraceful as the black-is-white propaganda produced by Putin’s regime, and even more dangerous

    As Russian troops and armored columns advance in eastern Ukraine, the Ukrainian government begs for aid from the free world it hoped would receive it and protect it as one of its own. The leaders of the free world, meanwhile, are struggling to find the right terminology to free themselves from the moral responsibility to provide that protection. Putin’s bloody invasion of a sovereign European nation is an incursion, much like Crimea — remember Crimea? — was an “uncontested arrival” instead of anschluss. A civilian airliner was blown out of the sky just six weeks ago — remember MH17? — and with more than 100 victims still unidentified, the outrage has already dissipated into polite discussions about whether it should be investigated as a crime, a war crime or neither.

    This vocabulary of cowardice emanating from Berlin and Washington today is as disgraceful as the black-is-white propaganda produced by Putin’s regime, and even more dangerous. Moscow’s smoke screens are hardly necessary in the face of so much willful blindness. Putin’s lies are obvious and expected. European leaders and the White House are even more eager than the Kremlin to pretend this conflict is local and so requires nothing more than vague promises from a very safe distance. As George Orwell wrote in his 1946 essay on language right before starting work on his novel 1984 (surely not a coincidence): “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” The Western rhetoric of appeasement creates a self-reinforcing loop of mental and moral corruption. Speaking the truth now would mean confessing to many months of lies, just as it took years for Western leaders to finally admit Putin didn’t belong in the G-7 club of industrialized democracies.

    Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko just met with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington, but Obama’s subsequent statement showed no sign he’s willing to acknowledge reality. Generic wishes about “mobilizing the international community” were bad enough six months ago. Hearing them repeated as Ukrainian towns fall to Russian troops is a parody. (If legitimacy is what Obama is after, Russia is clearly in violation of nearly every point of the 1974 U.N. Resolution 3314, “definition of aggression.”) Perhaps Poroshenko should have matched Obama’s casual wardrobe by wearing a T-shirt that read, “It’s a War, Stupid.” As Russian tanks and artillery push back the overmatched Ukrainian forces, Obama’s repeated insistence that there is no military solution in Ukraine sounds increasingly delusional. There is no time to teach a drowning man to swim. [snip]

    And yet war has arrived regardless, as it always does in the face of weakness.

    As one of the pioneers of the analogy I feel the irony in how it has quickly gone from scandal to cliché to compare Putin to Hitler, for better and for worse. Certainly Putin’s arrogance and language remind us more and more of Hitler’s, as does how well he has been rewarded for them. For this he can thank the overabundance of Chamberlains in the halls of power today — and there is no Churchill in sight.

    As long as it is easy, as long as Putin moves from victory to victory without resistance, he gains more support. He took Crimea with barely a shot fired. He flooded eastern Ukraine with agents and weaponry while Europe dithered. The oligarchs who might have pressured Putin at the start of his Ukrainian adventure are now war criminals with no way back. The pressure points now are harder to reach.

    The Russian military commanders, the ones in the field, are not fools. They are aware that NATO is watching and could blow them to bits in a moment. They rely on Putin’s aura of invincibility, which grows every day the West refuses to provide Ukraine with military support. Those commanders must be made to understand that they are facing an overwhelming force, that their lives are in grave danger, that they can and will be captured and prosecuted. To make this a credible threat requires immediate military aid, if not yet the “boots on the ground” everyone but Putin is so keen to avoid. If NATO nations refuse to send lethal aid to Ukraine now it will be yet another green light to Putin.

    Sanctions are still an important tool, and those directly responsible for commanding this war, such as Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu must be held accountable. Sanctions must also broaden. The chance to limit them only to influential individuals and companies is over. The Russian people can change Putin’s course but have little incentive to take the great risks to do so under current conditions. Only sanctions that bring the costs of Putin’s war home can have an impact now. This was always a last resort, and it wouldn’t be necessary had the West not reacted with such timidity at every step. (The other factor that is already dimming the Russian people’s fervor is the Russian military casualties the Kremlin propaganda machine is trying so hard to cover up.)

    As always when it comes to stopping dictators, with every delay the price goes up. Western leaders have protested over the potential costs of action Ukraine at every turn only to be faced with the well-established historical fact that the real costs of inaction are always higher. Now the only options left are risky and difficult, and yet they must be tried. The best reason for acting to stop Putin today is brutally simple: it will only get harder tomorrow.

  4. …and throw Debbie Wasserman Shultz in with the stupid dims ‘war on women’…they really think we are stupid and so dependent on them to get anywhere in life…

    …just like they treat AA…as if all Americans are stupid without the Dims to tell us how to live our lives…

    …but Debbie takes the cake…her language towards Scott Walker was insulting and demeaning to women…it was so obvious how she and the Dims are so ready to exploit and manipulate women…I felt like calling her office and letting her know she’s not fooling women who are living in the 21st century…but decided it wasn’t worth my time…Debbie has become such a disappointment…I suspect she will be a diehard Hillary supporter once again but I will never be able to believe anything out of her month again…imo, she is the worst kind of opportunist

  5. I’m so far behind on the posts and before I could give out a “HELL YES!” to admin on the union scamsters against their workers…up pops a new thread by admin.

    I feel like a student that slept in during their midterm exam. Darn job is taking all my Hillaryis44 time.

    Rats!

  6. I’m still upset by the passing of Joan Rivers, just saw her live in London on TV, had me in tears laughing…

    Never will be another like her……..

  7. agree Moon…I feel sad too…she was a dynamo and in her prime at 81…and was robbed years from her life…amazing woman…

  8. Admin:

    If there is any moral to this story of from loves close kiss to hell’s abyss then it must be this:

    He who lives by the sword will surely die by the sword.

    Until Obama, American Presidents were motivated by two forces, broadly speaking, i.e.

    1. the general welfare: to be achieved through governing in a responsible manner consistent with the constitution.

    2. political realities: defined by power of the bully pulpit, the need for public support and catering to the base of the party.

    Obama changed that matrix forever.

    He subordinated the welfare welfare to the welfare of his donors. Their private agenda became his thinly veiled agenda for the nation. And when this produced losses, Obama socialized the losses and he privatized the gains. Every time a crisis emerged for the nation, either domestically or abroad, he ran as fast as he could from the White House to yet another fundraiser. Big media applauded this practice because they believed that they would be the ultimate recipient of those funds, when he bought air time on their networks.

    He governed entirely by political realities and calculation. For him, those political realities involved dividing the nation by race, gender, legal vs illegal immigrant, to keep and maintain power. And then implementing a set of policies that would enrich his donors, bankrupt the middle class, emasculate our foreign policy, and treat the Constitution and the rule of law like toilet paper.

    Too bad for the glorious big media beloved messiah that his chickens are coming home to roost during the dying days of his presidency. No longer a messiah, he is now seen as a cad at best, and at worst a destroyer of worlds. Big media who has been with him heart and soul up to this point is getting nervous. They can see their own chickens coming home to roost as well. And they cannot defend the optics of a president who manifests no interest in the country or the job they elected him to do, on their promise even more so than his that he would create a new heaven and a new earth.

    In sum, he who lives by politics will die by politics, because politics devoid of principle will lead not only him but any other leader down those paths will lead only to despair and from which no one ever returns. My fondest hope in all his is that big media rots in hell for the role they played as his accomplice. They are beneath contempt.

  9. I was watching an old episode of Law and Order, wherein an undercover police officer working narcotics is tossed off the roof of a building in Manhattan and lands on a squad car. The medical examiner determined that she was shot and killed prior to being thrown off a roof. She turns out to be the daughter of a police officer who wrote a book exposing corruption of a certain progressive politician who has an ambition to become President. He has a hatchet face and an arrogant demeanor like Tom Harkin at a steak fry. The politician has a vile snake of a staffer, who acts as the hatchet man of his boss and finds ingenious ways to destroy opponents and their families . In this case, he leaked information to newspaper about the undercover officer to a reporter who published it and that was what got the officer murdered. At the same time, he cut off all access to all politicians for another reporter who refused to publish it because it was obvious that it would blow the officer’s cover. The district attorney planned to submit the case to a grand jury, but upon reflection he decided that if he did that the snake would start shredding documents so he had him arrested. He was released on bail, and he sent a mountain of paperwork to the district attorney’s office in response to a subpoena and when the district attorney hired law students to review it, the snake got to one of them, and had them plant a false exculpatory document on the hard drive, which led to charges of prosecutorial misconduct. But upon further investigation the district attorney discovered the fraud and confronted the snake with it. The snake denied it all, and promised to bury him. Then the prosecutor did a very smart thing. He told him that he would be charged second degree murder and the sentence would be 15 years to life unless . . . he had evidence that his boss, the great progressive Tom Harkin look alike was involved. In other words, he offered the staffer a chance to trade up which was quickly rejected. Shortly thereafter, the progressive politician who hoped to be president visited the district attorneys office pale as a sheet. He told him that he would see to it that his right hand man accepted the 15 years to life, but there must be no further fishing expedition directed against himself. In other words, murder and evidence tampering were bad enough, but the great progressive had worse things to hide. And although the story was fictional I wondered whether the late senator Teddy Kennedy was not the inspiration for it. And it begs the inevitable question of how many real life staffers for big name senator and congressman are capable of doing the same thing. This unholy alliance between politicians, staffers, lobbyist and big media define the vile state of corruption that is Washington.

  10. Oh yes, I almost forgot. Fred Dalton Thompson, the faux Republican hope, played the role of the prosecutor’s boss. Seeing all this, he made a closing comment that Edith Bunker would have been too ashamed to utter. He said, well, this is democracy and democracy is still the best form of government. Good work Fred. Tell it to the dead police officer.

  11. Comment: under the Brady decision, prosecutors are required to turn over documents to the defense which suggest that the defendant may be innocent. In this case, the prosecutor’s ignorance of the false document, which was inserted after the hard drive was scanned, and then purloined and given to the defense formed the (false) basis for the charge of proprietorial misconduct.

  12. Why does the great media beloved Messiah support groups affiliated with ISIS? Enquiring minds want to know.
    Well, lets see.

    The quick answer from his supporters is: because he is brilliant and we are not. We think in terms of us vs. them. He thinks in terms of a great undivided whole. The conflict we think we see, the deaths, the beheadings are figments of our imagination, and if not, then they are not his doing.

    Much to his credit so goes their argument he is showing the world the way. His motives are clear and it is heresy to question them. Those who presume to raise doubts concerning his motives, his inactions, and his mental competency are ipso facto racists who cannot stand to see a black man in the white house, according the big media.

    Well, maybe, may be we are all rednecks that is all there is to it. We just can’t stand to see him succeed.

    But, there is an alternate explanation for all this. But before you utter it you must understand the risks entailed. You could find yourself with an IRS audit, or a vicious attack by a staffer just like the one depicted in the Law and Order episode above, or you could be beheaded by his allies as they do with Christians and lately journalists.

    Mindful of these risks, the estimable Richard Rodriguez has done what the trembling towers of tapioca and butt boys of big media refuse to do: Provide an alternative explanation to the elite consensus that his perceived incompetence is based on the wisdom that passeth all understanding, rather than borderline insanity. It all revolves around the central premise of Obama’s foreign relations strategy in re leading from behind:

    “When you lead from the front, you control the coalition. When you lead from behind, the coalition controls you. This indecision can be disguised under the pose of “sophistication” or “nuance,” where you claim to adapt your behavior to the “context.” But it is really a euphemism for spinelessness. When you’re not in charge, someone else is. Since Obama has declined to take charge, someone else has. Because in the last analysis, no game theoretic and certainly no war can have meaning unless it defines at least two terms: us and them.

    This explains why everything is so confusing. Why nothing makes sense to lesser mortals. Without a course of his own to steer, Obama’s ship of state seems blown this way and that by every puff of wind. Don’t worry that he’s relinquished the stick and rudder of the airplane to the foe, because he has the trim wheel firmly in hand. Yet if you can’t explain policy even to your supporters, there’s a good chances the policy is actually inexplicable. This is a possibility Obama’s most ardent supporters cannot admit. It is pitiful to watch them reduced to deciphering hieroglyphics on a wall. They’ll be damned if they can understand it, but assume it says something profound”.

    http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/09/03/writing-on-the-wall/

  13. foxyladi14
    September 5, 2014 at 9:43 am
    hi
    ——————–
    Hurry back foxy. admin’s been pumping out bodacious posts (today’s is like a Christmas gift!) but this place will not be the same until you’re your former self with emoticons to spare. 🙂 🙂

  14. As far as the over-the-counter birth control pills that one Repub is proposing…my guess is that isn’t going to happen in my lifetime.

    1- Because it will raise Hell with nitwits like Sweaters and the far right-wingers. Oh the outcry from those parents.

    1- Because Doctors will not be able to have their boot on the necks of young teen girls and women.

    2- Because Big Pharma will not be able to jack up the prices like they have in decades.

    3- Because the Insurance Co.’s might lose some of those females on their insurance rolls if they sell next to ‘women’s products’ in Walmart.

    Think of the big Nitwit Revolt just getting the ‘pills’ covered for ‘free’ in ObamaHellCare. Both parties went nuts for nada.

  15. Garry Kasparov: It’s a War, Stupid!

    Kasparov hates the old school Russia, even though they groomed him to be the Chess Champion that he was.

    Did Kasparov actually think Obama would live up to any standard besides the slacker he has been for 6 years?

    The pawn is off the board, Garry.

  16. 9/5/14. Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) spoke to Martha of America’s Newsroom about the Obama Administration’s hush tactics regarding the Benghazi attack. He also talked about the new report that a U.S. security team in Benghazi was held back from immediately …

  17. This, or worst (as we recently wrote) is all beginning to become the inescapable conclusion. The verbiage used by exterminator Delay sounds a lot as if Delay has been reading us here:

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/tom-delay-obama-paralyzed-by-muslim-sympathies/

    President Obama’s left-leaning political ideology combined with sympathies for Islam acquired from being raised by a Muslim stepfather paralyze him as he faces the threat posed by the Islamic jihadist group ISIS, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told WND in an interview.

    “In defending America against radical Islamic terrorism, Barack Obama cannot be trusted,” DeLay said.

    “Barack Obama was raised a Muslim, and he claims he is a Christian, and I can’t say for sure whether he’s a Christian or not, but he has shown over the last few years that he has great sympathies with Islam,” DeLay explained.

    “You combine that with Obama’s political orientation that is far to the left,” he continued, “and you get a president who hates war, hates the military, and you have a formula for military inaction when it comes to combating radical Islamic terrorists like we are seeing in ISIS.”

    DeLay’s indictment of Obama did not end there.

    “You add to mix that Barack Obama is incompetent, way over his head as president, and the whole combination produces a worldview that makes Obama detached and reluctant to take the type of the military action against ISIS that would be effective,” he said

    DeLay concluded Obama “does not want to face the reality of the danger and threat represented to the United States by ISIS, and he does not want to admit the connections between al-Qaida and ISIS, because he refuses to understand that we are in a war against radical Islamic terrorism.”

  18. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/obama-immigration-order-110624.html

    More top Democrats are pressuring President Barack Obama to slow down on immigration reform, further diminishing the chances that he’ll take sweeping administrative action before Election Day.

    Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) wants Obama to wait until after November. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) said he has “concerns about executive action.” Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who caucuses with Democrats, said it would be a “mistake” for the president to do anything significant.

    Until now, few Democrats have been willing to break publicly with Obama over his vow to issue an executive order on immigration. Democratic incumbents in this year’s most competitive Senate races have already voiced concern, but the calls from others to hold off on acting suggests Democrats are growing even more anxious about the decision and its potential to upend the fight for control of the Senate.

    White House officials have been locked in an intense debate over whether Obama should announce a program to defer deportations for millions of undocumented immigrants before Election Day. A delay would mark a major reversal from June, when the president stood in the Rose Garden and pledged to issue an order by the end of the summer, and it would infuriate the Hispanic community.

    But the flagging support among senators is particularly worrisome to the White House, which will be reluctant to make such a controversial move without the strong backing of congressional Democrats.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declined Thursday to say that Obama should act ahead of the election — a noncommittal posture that reflects the deep divisions within his caucus. [snip]

    The personal attention has done little to soothe the activists, who are furious over the White House’s handling of the decision.

    “Our community is done with broken promises,” said Lorella Praeli, director of advocacy and policy for United We Dream. “There are real consequences in the community.”

    At a Capitol Hill meeting Wednesday, a Reid aide warned advocates to not attack the vulnerable Senate Democrats from Alaska, Louisiana, Arkansas and North Carolina who have urged the president to go slow. Efforts to publicly pressure the group would most likely backfire, the aide warned. Those Democrats won’t want to support Obama once he does issue an order, whenever it comes, and that could compel him to go with a smaller package because of the limited political support, according to sources familiar with the meeting. [snip]

    King urged Obama to reassess his decision to use his executive authority, saying “it would inflame the issue and I just think it would be a mistake.

    “I would oppose a unilateral action of a significant nature on immigration reform both on constitutional grounds and on policy grounds,” King said in an interview. “I hope the White House and the administration are reconsidering their statements on unilateral action.” [snip]

    Hispanic Federation President José Calderón predicted there would be a lot of protests if there is no action taken by the end of September.

  19. FOX News is nailing Hillary for her comment in Las Vegas yesterday. She said that Climate Change was the biggest problem facing our country. The FIVE on FOX except for Bob Beckel of course is saying that maybe we need to look elsewhere for a president instead of Hillary. They are tying her with comments John Kerry made as well.

    Maybe if the media had gone after Barack Obama back in 2008 and had attacked everything he said like they do Hillary we might not be in the mess we are today.

    Maybe if the Supremes had not gifted George Bush Jr. the presidency we might not be in the mess we are in either. It seems that the history of the Bushs is being re-written.

  20. I am not sure Hillary is the same “candidate” or “person” she was all those years ago when I thought she was the best person for the job. Maybe I have become cynical I don’t know.

    In 2008 she would have been the BEST person for the job, I without a doubt believe that.

    Much has changed.

  21. Much has changed.

    Nope Dot48, Hillary hasn’t changed except she has more experience now.

    Only your perception may have changed, but I remember you over at PUMApac, and it seems you haven’t changed since 2009 or so.

    I haven’t changed either.

  22. I’m a little off topic here, but we had an Identity Theft presentation at work today that has me freaked out. Soon some credit cards will have a chip with your information on it instead of the the stripe. This has been done in other countries for some time. Passports also have chips. But what most people do not know is that hackers can steal that info off your card from a distance of up to 27 feet away. They do make card protectors but it is just one more cost for the average American.

    Yes they scan!

  23. Update: GOP hopes this November brighten now that we have more Obama: I’ll be making an announcement on amnesty “soon”.

    Barack will violate the Constitution and that is criminal enough. But the Obama Dimocrats who want Obama to wait to make his unconstitutional diktat after the November elections in order to spare them from the wrath of the voters are even worse. Senator Jeff Sessions has it right:

    “The only thing that is more shocking than Senate Democrats’ support for the President’s planned executive amnesty is the cravenness of asking him to proceed beginning the day after the midterms. Once again, powerful politicians are colluding with powerful interest groups to deny you, the American citizen, the protection of your laws and your voice in government. They don’t care what you want, or what you think—they scorn and mock our good and decent citizens for wishing their laws to be enforced.”

    ———————————————————

  24. Shit, what do I know.

    The exterminator claims it is Obama’s muslim sympathies.

    That could be it I suppose, he being raised as a Muslim, educated by Muslims (Franklin Marshall Davis), and supported by Muslims (the affirmative action he received from the Saudi Royal family in getting into Harvard Law School, despite mediocre undergraduate grades.)

    Or, it could be simpler than that. It could just be that Obama and ISIS have on important thing in common. They both love to swing a stick. In one case it is a stick with a sharp blade at the end, and a human head on the receiving end. In the other case, it is a stick with a Ping club head at the end, and a Titleist golf ball on the receiving end.

    Which is why I for one would be reluctant to give the big media beloved messiah a mulligan.

    Unfortunately, the electorate as a whole was far less discriminating in 2012.

  25. What Hillary said was,”Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face.” The “we” being the operative word as she was speaking at an energy conference, not an army base. I say critics are out of context.

  26. “The only thing that is more shocking than Senate Democrats’ support for the President’s planned executive amnesty is the cravenness of asking him to proceed beginning the day after the midterms. Once again, powerful politicians are colluding with powerful interest groups to deny you, the American citizen, the protection of your laws and your voice in government. They don’t care what you want, or what you think—they scorn and mock our good and decent citizens for wishing their laws to be enforced.”
    ——————
    What better justification for a third party could there possibly be than that?

  27. What Hillary said was,”Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face.” The “we” being the operative word as she was speaking at an energy conference, not an army base. I say critics are out of context.
    ————–
    That may or may not be true.

    Reasonable minds differ.

    Terrorism, illegal immigration, unemployment, etc.

    Present an equal challenge which is in front of us now

    Not off in the distant future.

    The only thing that is unequivocally true is this:

    The cure, i.e. a green energy exchange, is good for Soros.

    That is why he is pushing democrats to push that.

  28. holdthemaccountable
    September 5, 2014 at 10:00 am
    foxyladi14
    September 5, 2014 at 9:43 am
    hi
    ——————–
    Hurry back foxy. admin’s been pumping out bodacious posts (today’s is like a Christmas gift!) but this place will not be the same until you’re your former self with emoticons to spare. 🙂 🙂
    ___________

    I second Hold’em’s comment Foxy.

  29. Admin

    Barack will violate the Constitution and that is criminal enough. But the Obama Dimocrats who want Obama to wait to make his unconstitutional diktat after the November elections in order to spare them from the wrath of the voters are even worse

    ______________

    This is spot-on. The Dims may be so out of touch that they perceive this to be merely smart political strategizing. However, given the significant violation this executive order would represent, the Dims who support it, but who want it to be issued after November are not only complicit in the violation, but they are seeking to deceive voters in a major way.

  30. Never posted at PumaPac so you have the wrong person. Totally supported Hillary, never spoke against her, remember the days of Taylor Marsh! The world has changed, the US has changed, my state of WV has defintely changed .. the war on coal has been hard on us. This state will never support another Democrat and we overwhelmingly supported Hillary who has suddenly become more worried about climate change (oh by the way the Polar Ice cap has grown more in the last few years than ever)

    I respect the woman for her ability to bounce back from hard stuff in life but then again she is WOMAN she is automatically tough.

    That being said, with the war on coal I will be watching very carefully ALL candidates and their stance on industry that affects our livelihood.

  31. Lu4PUMA

    September 5, 2014 at 7:28 pm

    What Hillary said was,”Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face.”

    Kudos, Lu4PUMA 🙂 . One of the things I really adore about Hillary is that unlike bumbles the great, Hillary tailors her speeches/remarks to the audience she is appearing before. Her brand of tailoring is not one of saying that everything is Nirvana or just telling the audience what they want to hear, rather it is a conversation steeped in reality. Emergency/Trauma physicians treat immediate threat to life first and then long term threat to stable health later. That means if your heart stops you get a dose of epinephrine. After your heart restarts while you are in recovery, you may get a course of anti-hypertensive meds to counter the blood pressure spike required to keep you alive. There is no doubt in my mind that Hillary sees the immediate threats in the ME and in the Ukraine as our immediate threat to safety, but what do we need to focus on after that? Even the verbiage she uses “…collection of challenges…” demonstrates the framework surrounding its importance and the pathway to her approach.

    I have always felt that both the climate change phenomenon and our energy situations are our journey to the moon and our Manhattan project. Both situations are problems that the United States is singularly capable of dealing with, and historically called upon to solve. Yes, the Russians were trying to get to the moon at the same time. But NASA got there first. The Germans tried to develop the nuke. The Japanese tried to develop the nuke. Neither was successful. Yes, the Russians did develop the nuke, but not from the ground up (they used quite a bit of espionage, thank you very much). Both were considered, and verbalized by the leadership at the time, as challenges. Both were overcome at the cost of great treasure and life. But I say again, both were overcome. And the results of overcoming the two challenges reverberate today in both our county’s use of nuclear power and continued space exploration. The same can be true for climate change. But, as was the case in the 1940’s and the 1960’s, it will require GOOD leadership.

    Is it 2016 yet?

    Hillary 2016

  32. freespirit

    September 5, 2014 at 8:31 pm

    holdthemaccountable
    September 5, 2014 at 10:00 am
    foxyladi14
    September 5, 2014 at 9:43 am
    hi
    ——————–
    Hurry back foxy. admin’s been pumping out bodacious posts (today’s is like a Christmas gift!) but this place will not be the same until you’re your former self with emoticons to spare. 🙂 🙂
    ___________

    I second Hold’em’s comment Foxy.
    ________________

    Aye!!

    Hillary 2016

  33. The Rock

    One of the things I really adore about Hillary is that unlike bumbles the great, Hillary tailors her speeches/remarks to the audience she is appearing before. Her brand of tailoring is not one of saying that everything is Nirvana or just telling the audience what they want to hear, rather it is a conversation steeped in reality. Emergency/Trauma physicians treat immediate threat to life first and then long term threat to stable health later. That means if your heart stops you get a dose of epinephrine. After your heart restarts while you are in recovery, you may get a course of anti-hypertensive meds to counter the blood pressure spike required to keep you alive. There is no doubt in my mind that Hillary sees the immediate threats in the ME and in the Ukraine as our immediate threat to safety, but what do we need to focus on after that? Even the verbiage she uses “…collection of challenges…” demonstrates the framework surrounding its importance and the pathway to her approach.
    _________________

    Rock – insightful, brilliant.

  34. Earlier this week the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wassermann Schultz, portrayed Governor Scott Walker, along with conservatives, the Tea Party, and the Republican party as a whole, as abusive cavemen intent on dragging women back in time by their hair. While these comments can hardly be considered shocking when coming from one of the most foul attack dogs the left has under their employ, they are clearly not the comments of a sane person. Hyperbolic rhetoric like this is beyond the pale, and the weak non-apology apologies that follow only go to testify against the abhorrent nature of the original comments.–Red State blog
    ————–
    What are we to make of all this.

    More specifically, what are we to make of Debbie Wasserman Schultz—other than a bad haircut.

    Well, there are times when life imitates art

    And this happens to be one of those times.

    Simply put, Debbie survives on hate

    And, the character she most resembles is Madam DeFarge

    To wit:

    Madame Defarge is a fictional character in the book A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. She is a tricoteuse, a tireless worker for the French Revolution. She is arguably the main villain of the novel, obsessed with revenge against the Evrémondes. She ruthlessly seeks revenge against the Evrémondes, including Charles Darnay, his wife Lucie Manette and their child, for crimes a prior generation of the Evrémonde family had committed. Defarge knits, and her knitting secretly encodes the names of people to be killed. Defarge also symbolizes the nature of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution in which radical Jacobins engaged in mass persecution of all real or supposed enemies of the Revolution who were executed on grounds of sedition to the new republic through the guillotine.

  35. And this gets to the underlying truth of the matter:

    From the French Revolution

    To the Bolshevik Revolution

    To the Obama Revolution

    Is but one long unbroken chain.

    Because every last one of them is a Jacobin at heart.

  36. admin
    September 5, 2014 at 7:20 pm
    Update: GOP hopes this November brighten now that we have more Obama: I’ll be making an announcement on amnesty “soon”.
    ————————
    Maybe this will bring the turning point desperately needed.
    I have it at FB under Senator Session’s link. The three FB comments I placed after that contain appropriate {to the individual) tweets I’ve sent to my US Senators, Congressman.
    Having done this, I find myself filled with emotion. Without admin’s vigilance, how would I have known? So grateful for this blog and all who support it.

  37. Mitch McConnell is in trouble. Despite his position, power and advantage of incumbency, he is holding only a slight 4 point lead over his democrat challenger Grimes–who describes herself as a Clinton democrat, (as opposed to an Obama demorat). Knowing Mitch as I do, and knowing nothing about Grimes, except for the fact that she professes to be a Clinton democrat, this would be an easy decision for me were I a resident of Kentucky. If the Tea Party people stay home in this mid term, then Mitch will be history. Given the fact that establishment Republicans have done their little Kristalnaught on the Tea Party candidates there, certainly in Mississippi and elsewhere, I regard that as a likely possibility.

    This was mentioned in a recent article that appeared in the Baltimore Sun by a political writer originally from my town, who shall remain nameless. What I will tell you about his however is that he is a left wing ideologue, which is perhaps why he has been awarded two Pulitzer Prizes. It was surely not his devotion to the truth because he has none.

    His latest tactic for confusing the nation was to offer this Potemkin Village morality play, which may con the stupid, but covers up the underlying reality of our political system and the Tea Party’s value proposition. Just listen to this turd:

    “The dilemma facing the true grassroots tea party believers — the dilemma they do not acknowledge — is that their primary goal of whittling and whacking away at big government undercuts their secondary goal of saving the middle class from the greedy grip of big corporations.”

    If Democrats have a unifying philosophy, it is that government needs to be effective enough to curtail the economic and environmental abuses of unfettered capitalism. Republicans, on the other hand, preach the dogma that smaller government and unrestricted corporate power serves the best interests of the common man and woman.”

    I cannot speak for all conservatives, but to me the problem with government is not that it saves us from the control of corporations, but that it is controlled by them. It is, or has become a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And that, more than anything else, is why the elites get their way 4 times out of 5, and the people get their way only 1 time out of 5 according to a recent study by two Princeton Professor. This amnesty business is a perfect case in point.

    If you take a close look at who funds the politicians who deplore corporate control it turns out to be other corporations with a different set of interests. So there are no virgins in this whorehouse, and that more than anything else is the gravamen of the Tea Party complaint. Yes, the Tea Party deplores the arrogance of officialdom. But that does not mean they support the uber capitalist. They are two wings of the same bird.

    Therefore, the assertion that democrats are for the people and republicans are for big corporations. The two parties are in pare delicto. Until we have a viable third party in this country, we must be careful who we vote for, and recognize that party label alone is not enough. Democrats are for big corporations too, and Republicans are for big government. Therefore, we should not be surprised when both of them screw the American People.

    But we should be especially contemptuous of those who offer up the kind of false narrative we see above. Because they are ideologues, and they never let a little thing like the truth stand in the way of their dogma. They prevent the American People from seeing the real problem, and for them, the only question that matters is whose side are you on?

    The tea party folks have largely bought into that belief, but still they are uncomfortable with Republicans who appear to be too much in thrall to big business.

  38. correction: please ignore the last sentence above. You can ignore the whole thing if you like, but I am pretty damned sure that there is more than a grain of truth in it, and there will come a point where things come to a head.

  39. This “greedy” corporations nonsense is another indicator that we are dealing with an ideologue. Again, for him, the only question that matters is whose side are you on. Therefore, it is unthinkable for him that the corporations who support liberal demomcrats like Ed Marky could be greedy. And it is equally unthinkable that Ed Markey like other politicians would gladly do their bidding, without regard to the general welfare. Once this rat was cornered, what do you suppose the first words out of his mouth would be? Take a wild guess. . . Citizens United! Bull shit. McCain Feingold had as much to do with it, when stupid ass McCain got his ass handed to him by Soros, who carved out the 527 exception which ultimately swallowed to rule, and really opened the floodgates to dirty money.

  40. CONFIRMED: White House formally telling lawmakers and advocacy groups that Obama will delay decision on immigration until after elections.

    So basically he is going to shaft everyone between Nov and January before a new Senate can be installed.

  41. Rule of thumb: When the WH puts out a big news story on a Saturday morning, they don’t really want you to notice……..hence the immigration amnesty being dropped slips out at 9am on a Saturday……..

  42. OT…

    for Moon or anyone else thinking of Joan…so many tributes…here are two that reflect her kindness and sense of fun…

    http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2014/09/05/joan-rivers-the-entertainer/

    http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/nocturnalist-remembers-joan-rivers/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

    moon, if you have not seen the nocturnalist rememberance yet I think you will enjoy the very short clip from a party a Joan’s home…I, for one, love her decor…

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

    when someone dies people sometimes say it is like a light has gone out…with Joan it is like a full blown spotlight has dimmed…

  43. Just to elaborate on Climate Change, you can expect it to blossom when Russia starts feeding China all those fossil fuels. China is already becoming a toxic pit, but they are also polluting the rest of the world. It will be in the air you breath and fish that swim in the oceans we share. These will be major issues to bring world leaders to the table. Not as short term as ISIS who could be annihilated if the world united.

    I know about whats in your water.

    Shame on our leaders who did not have the foresight and courage to develop clean, green energy and industry in our country. In their shame is the solution to alot of our problems. Bill Clinton understood how to do this through the EPA. They actually did become too powerful and abusive, but the pendulum has now swung too far the other way. Public Health is not being protected. Bush disassembled the organization and Obama is too stupid to know how to rebuild it and use it. He chose the IRS.

    Hillary understands what Bill knew. It is not what you have but how you use it. To use environmental programs to get the wheels going and benefit the public health is not something a hack like O knows how to do. To him it is just a matter of how much he can rape the system. And that is something he can use the IRS alot more effective to do.

    Hillary 2016!!!

  44. Well, here is some good news.

    Under the fallibly infallible Rasmussen poll, which has been untethered from the moorings of reality ever since Scott left, and Soros bought in, Obama’s approval rate is shooting up like a Roman candle to a breath taking 47%, which is a reliable harbinger of huge Democrat gains in the House, and retention of the Senate.

    Delusion you say? May-be. But let us assume for the sake of argument its true.

    The question then becomes:

    What is it that the big media beloved messiah has done during the past few weeks to re-ignit his popularity?

    What is that inner eye that the 47% have that we do not

    Which validates his scorched earth politics, foreign disasters and dereliction of duty?

    Mindful of the mental capacity of the 47%, there are two possible explanations for this surge of support amid the ruins.

    1. Admitting that he had no strategy to deal with ISIS?. or-

    2. Going gaga overthe gowns Michelle is wearing to his gala fundraisers?

    So which is it?

    Or shall we just flip a coin?

    To call that 47% “stupid” would be a Guinness Book of World Records understatement.

  45. So when Rass prefaces these depressing results which bear on the larger question of whether the American People are capable of self government with the pithy phase “what they told us”, you begin to wonder who “they” is. My best guess is Debbie Downer, Oprah, and half the patients at the mental ward. Oh, maybe a few more–like Geraldo, Ed Schultz and the head of CNN. I realize of course there may be some duplication there because it is quite possible that the last three are already patients at the mental war, who are out on work release.

  46. Just to elaborate on Climate Change, you can expect it to blossom when Russia starts feeding China all those fossil fuels
    ———–
    And I do.

    But what is the answer.

    This bullshit of the United States taking the lead, punishing the middle class, and hoping that China and Russia follow suit is akin to the unilateral disarmament policies of the left on nuclear weapons prior to the fall of the Soviet Union.

    What got the job done was linkage. As in: if you Russia/China see the same problem we do with the degradation of our planet and believe affirmative steps to curtail that problem, and spread the cost of same equally among all players, then we would be willing to take reciprocal steps of our own, subject to verification, i.e. trust but verify.

    Now that is a far cry from some asshole like Robert Redford who lives in Aspen and does not worry about the cost of energy coming down off the mountain like Moses, and telling the great unwashed that they are going to have to tighten their belts for the good of the planet, and set an example which other industrial nations will follow. (Note: and forget about this bullshit of having our taxpayers compensate the third world for what they will be missing out for not engaging in the same degradation of the planet that the industrial nations did. And for gods sake, take the profit out of it for conniving evil doers like Soros and his partner in crime Canadian billionaire and author of the Rio Treaty Chairman Mo who are looking to set up a very profitable green energy exchange. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on.

  47. The rebuttal argument? As a well known Chinese leader once said: it does not matter if the cat is white or black so long as it catches mice.

  48. The rebuttal to the rebuttal? Just because one cat forgoes chasing mice on his own does not mean the rest of the cats will do so. Not when catching mice is in their nature.

  49. wbboei,

    What the answer is, is to unload the welfare roles and put people to work making the products we are buying from China. Let me tell you that women in the engineering profession peaked at 11% and is on the decline. If sack-of-shit Holder were out there protecting women and minorities in the workforce instead of Muslims building mosques, we could be developing our talent pool to blow the doors off those Troglodytes in China and Russia. But he and O are too damned busy raping the economy and installing bizarre ideologies.

    So you start with good old civil rights and a talent pool, you put them to work in clean, green productivity and you just do it. Hillary Clinton knows how to do that.

    That we should be a nation of banksters and computer geeks is ridiculous.

  50. What the answer is, is to unload the welfare roles and put people to work making the products we are buying from China.
    —————-
    That is a good sound bite. But the problem is during the Reagan years, the elites began bantering about the end of the industrial age, and the beginning of the information age. And they decided–unilaterally that we would hang on to finance, to information technology, but would allow manufacturing to migrate to the cheapest venues. Today, the entire world trading system rests on that premise, even to the point that the Virgin of Guadalupe statues sold in Tijuana come from China, even though she is the patron saint of Mexico. The answer would be some form of protectionism such as we saw in the early decades of our nations history. But the elites now tell us that protectionism is bad and it is what caused the Great Depression. I find that ironic however, because it is the reverse of protectionism, namely globalization, that is partially the culprit for the current depression, and I do not scruple to call it that. And they can take their phony 6% unemployment rate and stick it where the sun don’t shine. When 2 our of 5 people of working age are not working, the unemployment figure is not 6%. The real problem is how do we get the long term unemployed off the welfare rolls. If we cannot do that then we will have to inflate our way out of the crisis, and that will be a disaster. Nobody is honest any more.

  51. wbboei,

    Reagan has been dead for some time and the bantering elites have a financial system that is Ponzied beyond all reason. How much can the system be inflated before it bursts? Too big to fail is now too bigger to fail. How long can they dismiss the employment situation of the masses? How long can an unsustainable system be sustained? Will our national debt go on into infinity? That seems to be the premiss we are running on.

    I have a brother who is a bankster and I asked him what he thought about the state of the world financial situation. And he told me, the best way he could explain it was as in that movie, Too Big to Fail. Now this man has an IQ of almost 180 and I have known him all his life, but I was floored by his fairyland belief. I suspect they all live in fantasy. And they will do so for as long as they can.

    Maybe they will wake up when the cheaper venues own them. Or maybe we will get some leaders with some vision, who know that the Chinese ocean washes up on our shores. This is the hope in the meaning of the statement that Hillary Clinton made when speaking at that energy conference.

  52. Lu4PUMA

    September 6, 2014 at 4:54 pm

    wbboei,

    Reagan has been dead for some time and the bantering elites have a financial system that is Ponzied beyond all reason. How much can the system be inflated before it bursts? Too big to fail is now too bigger to fail. How long can they dismiss the employment situation of the masses? How long can an unsustainable system be sustained? Will our national debt go on into infinity? That seems to be the premiss we are running on.
    ——–
    Excellent questions.

    Your relative is too close to the forest to see the trees.

    I am no leftist, but I do know what the term exploitation means.

    The leftists are being exploited, but they are too dumb to see it.

    For them, it is fine and well, as long as the exploiter is not a white male.

    Got news for them:

    The color of exploitation is neither white nor black.

    It is green.

  53. We have got to be careful here too.

    We must not read profound meaning into vague statements.

    If you saw the Richard Rodriguez article above

    He notes the fact that this is what Obama supporters

    Are now doing.

    To try to explain that which is inexplicable

    Namely, Obama’s cloud cuckooland policies.

    There will be a lot of pressure on Hillary

    To allow the money men to continue cutting a fat hog

    After all, they control the party

    And it will be tempting for her to settle for symbolic gestures

    Like our city counsel is doing now with changing the name of Columbus Day

    So it is respectable to indigenous people.

    Despite the fact that Seattle was named for Chief Seattle

    They just want to feel good about themselves

    Ditto when they raised the minimum wage here to the highest in the nation

    Which will result in job losses as employers exit this market

    But so what. Just as long as the city counsel feels good about themselves.

    What I am saying is I am relying on Hillary to tackle the tough issues

    And than means staring down the elites of both parties

    For whom politics is nothing more than a lucrative game, or a flight of fancy.

  54. Global warming caused by mankind or by nature really isn’t the question to me.

    What does matter is that humans are polluting the plant. It’s water, air and soil.

    Part of the controversy really is about food production, industry, financial profits from polluting natural resources, jobs for their workers and their families, ownership of those natural resources, (leading to the power of those countries).

    What will our plant be like for our future grand and great-grand children? Will the smog and dirty water kill off the marine life and cause worse cases of lung cancer?

    That’s what I think about.

  55. Sorry for above two typos, I was just out watering my garden and had my mind still on my plants. I was talking about the PLANET above 🙂

  56. Update II: You can stop laughing now. “Red line” Obama has made his move. Unable to decide on whom to stab in the back, Barack Obama will stab everyone in the back – friend and foe alike. You know our first rule on Obama:

    Obama cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his foes. Obama cannot be trusted.

    This morning there was news breaking: Obama to delay immigration action until voters can’t punish Democrats for it. Obama in this one action stabs everyone in the back.

    Obama Dimocrats running for office will still have to answer for their support of Barack Obama as he burns the Constitution on the altar of illegal immigration amnesty politics. Their acts as co-conspirators who support diktat Obama will heighten as an issue because Obama says he will still violate the Constitution after the election and they will continue to support Obama.

    The American public opposed to illegal immigration amnesty has been stabbed in the back too and will not be fooled by Obama’s attempt to hide from accountability for his actions and the actions of Obama Dimocrats. The illegal immigration amnesty “dreamers” have a knife in their backs too:

    Obama’s decision abandons a pledge he made June 30 to act quickly after summer’s end, and it prompted an immediate and furious backlash from immigration advocates. [snip]

    Cristina Jimenez, managing director of United We Dream, said the decision was “another slap to the face of the Latino and immigrant community.”

    “Where we have demanded leadership and courage from both Democrats and the president, we’ve received nothing but broken promises and a lack of political backbone,” she said.

    Hey “dreamers” when you tongue kiss a snake don’t be surprised if you get a poison bite. Wake up “dreamers” Obama cannot be trusted by foe nor friend:

    “But Dreamers will not soon forget the president and Democrats’s latest failure and their attempts to fool the Latino community, and we remain resolute in fighting for justice for our families,” Jimenez added. [snip]

    “We advocates didn’t make the reform promise; we just made the mistake of believing it,” Sharry said. “The President and Senate Democrats have chosen politics over people; the status quo over solving real problems.”

    “It is hard to believe this litany of high expectations and broken promises will be mended by the end of the year,” he said.

    Adding onto what could be viewed as calls to mobilize against Democrats during a crucial election year, Sharry said “the stakes have only been raised; so is our determination.”

    Arturo Carmona, director of Presente.org, an online Latino organizing group, called the delay a “betrayal” and one of the “single biggest attacks on Latino families by the Democratic Party in recent memory.”

    “Treachery” and “Obama” are two words you will often find in the same sentence.

    [Thanks again to PowerLine for selection of our well timed article as a “pick”.]

    ———————————————————

  57. In attempting to placate the Democrats in the Senate AND the illegals/open border “children” (me, me, me, now, now, now) and leaking it, the Obama White House has stepped in it again. Expect ads with Republican candidates saying what sneaks and snakes the Democrats are including Obama and that they do not care what the citizenry want. Demonstrating and demanding anything will make citizens/voters LESS sympathetic to the illegal hordes.

  58. admin

    September 6, 2014 at 5:24 pm

    ————–

    Obama’s political strategy in re. on the immigration issue is as irrational illogical and inexplicable as his Sun Tsu pirouette in re. ISIS.

    As someone noted in a different context, he promised to unite the country, and once again he has done it. He has alienated everyone on both sides of the issue. He promised the illegals amnesty before the election and he did not get it. Zuckerberg and other capitalists who want cheap labor now, also got screwed. His goal was to save the red state dims, but promising to do it after the election cooks their goose. And he has emboldened his adversaries to hang his party by the balls.

    Common sense would have suggested he do the very opposite. That line from MacBeth–if tis done what ought to be done tis best that it be done quickly applies to this situation in spades. He would have been far better off circumventing congress now, so that his party goes into the election with a fait acompli which they could blame on him, rather than holding the sword of Damocles over their heads going into the election. The threat has more impact than its execution. Suppose he had done it now, and included strong provisions on border security tied to the ISIS threat. Suppose further that he had justified acting now, in order to protect the nation against ISIS. Had he done that, it might have worked.

    The estimable Richard Fernandez made the salient point that Obama’s leading from behind strategy with respect to ISIS is irrational, illogical and inexplicable. Nevertheless, his creative class supporters are busy sifting through the endtrails and discovering a wisdom that passeth all understanding.
    sure as god made little green apples, that does not stop his robotic creative class supporters from sifting through the entrails and discovering a wisdom that passeth all understanding.

    Nevertheless, that does not stop him or his supporters from plowing through the entrails trying to discover the secret meaning. And that leads to gibberish and more confusion. Amen.yyyy

    Well, his strategy

  59. Delete the last three paragraphs above. They are from an earlier draft. The reason this keeps happening is my computer is not allowing me to scroll down.

  60. admin

    September 6, 2014 at 5:24 pm

    ————–

    Obama’s political strategy in re. on the immigration issue is as irrational illogical and inexplicable as his Sun Tsu pirouette in re. ISIS.

    As someone noted in a different context, he promised to unite the country, and once again he has done it. He has alienated everyone on both sides of the issue. He promised the illegals amnesty before the election and he did not get it. Zuckerberg and other capitalists who want cheap labor now, also got screwed. His goal was to save the red state dims, but promising to do it after the election cooks their goose. And he has emboldened his adversaries to hang his party by the balls.

    Common sense would have suggested he do the very opposite. That line from MacBeth–if tis done what ought to be done tis best that it be done quickly applies to this situation in spades. He would have been far better off circumventing congress now, so that his party goes into the election with a fait acompli which they could blame on him, rather than holding the sword of Damocles over their heads going into the election. The threat has more impact than its execution. Suppose he had done it now, and included strong provisions on border security tied to the ISIS threat. Suppose further that he had justified acting now, in order to protect the nation against ISIS. Had he done that, it might have worked.

  61. wbboei
    September 6, 2014 at 11:21 pm
    admin

    September 6, 2014 at 5:24 pm

    ————–

    Obama’s political strategy in re. on the immigration issue is as irrational illogical and inexplicable as his Sun Tsu pirouette in re. ISIS.
    __________

    That’s what is so unbelievable. It IS illogical. Hell, I’m sure most of us already wondered how this could be so publicly discussed without the Republicans making major political hay out of it, and without the Immigrant activists and the general public feeling betrayed and deceived. When I had that logical thought I dismissed it – in part because for years – way back as far as 2008 when McCain refused to use any of the info regarding Rev. Wright or any other damning facts about Barack – the Republicans have been such slack-asses when it came to using the ammo Obama so freely and arrogantly provided. Secondly, I dismissed it as serious political fodder for the Pubs because I believed that, as always, MSM would spin and protect The One, and that the public would willingly buy into the lies and propaganda being passes off by the WH and media as truth.

    It was such a blatant screw-up, one that appeared to be appallingly and obviously illogical, why in the hell if Barack was too stoned, apathetic, or whatever to recognize it, did someone in his WH or in the Dim Party not tell him?

  62. Given that 62% of Americans oppose Barack’s amnesty plan, the fact that he and the Dims would proceed with whether before or after November, is a damn travesty. It’s one more case of Obama doing what the hell he wants to do, even if Americans don’t approve. He and the Dims think that amnesty will give the party the votes it needs to control the WH and congress well into the future. They have exploited blacks, women, and they seek to exploit Hispanics. They are a despicable lot. Not the party it used to be – or maybe it is.

    ________________

    From Rasmussen:

    Thursday, September 04, 2014

    Most voters oppose President Obama’s reported plan to unilaterally grant amnesty to several million illegal immigrants and think Congress should challenge him in court if he goes ahead with it

    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the president granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress. Just 26% are in favor of Obama’s plan, while 12% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
    Only 24% think the president has the legal authority to grant amnesty to these illegal immigrants without Congress’ approval. Fifty-seven percent (57%) believe the president does not have the legal right to do so. Eighteen percent (18%) are undecided.

    If the president does grant amnesty to several million illegals, 55% of voters think Congress should challenge that action in court. Thirty percent (30%) disagree, while 14% are undecided.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/august_2014/voters_strongly_oppose_obama_s_amnesty_plan_for_illegal_immigrants

  63. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the president granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress. Just 26% are in favor of Obama’s plan, while 12% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
    ———————
    Fucking Rass . . .

    Lets take a Rass Poll (MOE–whatever Soros wants)

    Question: should the world end tomorrow?

    62% oppose

    28% favor

    12% undecided

    And these are LIKELY voters

    What is the matter with that 12%?

    Oh, its the same 12% who insist that 2+2=5

    Or is that the 12% + 26% = 38% who think that?

    Dumber than owl shit.

  64. If the president does grant amnesty to several million illegals, 55% of voters think Congress
    ———–
    Preferably not in the DC Circuit, where the judges are corruptible. Their overturning of the well reasoned and correct Habib decision proves that much. And then this bullshit of hearing the case in banc after the liar in chief and his racist attorney general along with Reid have packed the court. They are now a kangaroo court. Nothing more.

  65. freespirit

    September 7, 2014 at 1:26 am
    ———–
    If the arrogant son of a bitch had a brain, he could have finessed the thing along the lines of what I suggested.

    Far be it from me, however, to interrupt an enemy in the middle of a mistake.

  66. Obama does not seem to me to have any strategy on anything.

    On the contrary, he just flops around like a dying mackerel on the poop deck of a fishing vessel.

    I am not talking about sound governing now. That was never his thing.

    I mean politics.

    Big media called him a political genius.

    And so did our presidential historian and glue sniffer Michael Bechloss.

    But we are now on the eve of an election

    And his political strategy staggers and sways across the public stage

    His political strategy and his political strategy can now be summed up in a single word:

    Dysfunctional.

  67. Obama and the Democrats have lost the consent of the governed. In our system that means disaster. It also does not mean that Republicans have gained it. We are seeing what happens when that occurs in the UK with the disunion vote in the UK with Scots polling tipping to Yes. When you ignore, villainize, hector, threaten, punish, and abuse entire regions, social classes, and races of an entire country you are asking for chaos. Obama and his Democrats have run up against sovereignty and the non-consent of the people. Rigging nominations and elections, using polling and media to manufacture consent, going to academia to rationalize obvious idiocy, parliamentary and legal tricks to circumvent ancient well functioning legal custom has been the plan and it has run its course.

    The Democrats have gotten away with this plan so far, and think they can alter the timing of “diktats” with no repercussions. The UK did this over the past 50 years. Do they understand it leads to “disunion”? Imagine the US in regions as separate countries with more common culture and economic interests. Would those countries be weaker that the US as a whole? At present I don’t think they would.

  68. Mormaer

    September 7, 2014 at 7:09 am

    —————-
    As you know, I have a very low opinion of the collective wisdom of the current electorate. This is a bit ironic because if you were to go back and read what I was saying here six years ago it was just the opposite. For me, the agenda that Obama is pursuing was entirely predictable. All you needed to do was to study Soros, just as you would not be surprised by the subsequent rise of Nazi Germany if you read Mein Kamf. And, but the way, the comparison of Obama to Hitler is not that great of a reach once you realize that this is still only the beginning of the transformation of this nation, and the invalidation of the Constitution. What I got wrong–entirely wrong was that there would come a point where the American People got wise. Never happened. And it never will. The upper middle class thought it was just wonderful to elect a black man. The young were seduced by his youth orientation and culture. Single women with no prospects for marriage wanted a sugar daddy. Blacks saw it as an opportunity to get even with whites, and believed, in error, that he would help them just because he promised to. Wealthy donors saw him as a vehicle for their own self actualization. Wall Street saw him as a way to socialize the losses of their financial fiascos (remember the conversation I mentioned where one of the big brokerage houses with a friend of mine present secretly forsaw the collapse in 1992, and kept their mouth shut about it, and the 36 economists never foresaw anything, nor did Andrea Mitchell’s husband beyond the pat phrase irrational exuberance. At this point I would sooner put my money on an old grey nag to win the Kentucky Derby than trust the American People as a whole to figure this out. If there is to be any hope for the future, it is dim and it will have to rest with a third party. and a public understanding that the conflict here is economic more than political.

  69. Two more months living in the age of fake and we will see another face emerge. After this November, I believe more reality will be revealed. There are 200-300 foreclosure auctions per week in the county I am living in. I have been monitoring them looking for opportunities and observe that the banks are running the show, price fixing the sales that amount to 30-40% of the total sales. I am wondering how this will change after November. I am afraid to buy a house, wondering what will happen, but then betting they will not find another scam to run to inflate them further after the election. I know they are trying to engage foreign investors, including the Chinese. Right now, My cousin in NJ with a modest house pays more for property taxes then I do for rent, but it is all money down the drain. The middle class cannot afford to live. It is like taxes and mandatory insurance (more taxes) take it all.

    Eight years of failed Bush and six years of failed Obama have taken their toll. Struggling for out economic lives, how can we protect our freedoms?

  70. Under Obama we have systemic collapse. It starts with foreign policy, then the financial system, and ends with the inability of the federal government to protect the security of the American People while subjecting them to a degree of control and micro management. If they were only smart enough to see over the horizon . . . But it is a fools errand to hope that they will. Give them enough bread and circuses, and they can be led rather easily like lambs to the slaughter. It might have been different if big media was an honest broker. But you can forget about that entirely. As much as Obama, those people are the root cause of the destruction of this nation.

  71. Obama assembles Coalition of the Useless to fight ISIS
    By: streiff (Diary) | September 6th, 2014 at 05:00 PM | 15

    RESIZE: AAA
    Share on Facebook 22 141 SHARES
    obama isisSpeaking at the closing of the NATO summit made another non-announcement about ISIS, the fundamentalist Islamic group rampaging through Iraq and Syria through the inaction of the Obama administration.

    Speaking at the closing of the Nato summit in Wales, the US president said the grouping, which also included Germany and Canada, “stood ready to confront this terrorist threat with military, intelligence, law enforcement as well as diplomatic efforts”.

    The 10 nations in the core coalition – first announced by Kerry – are the US, Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Turkey, Italy, Poland and Denmark. British sources did not share the phrase core coalition since the UK has been stressing this must not be seen as a western-led intervention but something that springs from Iraq and the wider Arab region, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey and even Iran. There are even signs that Washington is willing to co-ordinate with the Iranians to ensure there is no inadvertent clash as they put the squeeze on Isis.

    When compared to the 48 nations that contributed troops to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, this represents nothing short of an epic failure.

    iraq coalition

    2003 Iraq War coalition assembled by President Bush

    Notably missing is any Arab country. Only one Muslim nation, Turkey, is represented and based on their pro-ISIS actions to date one presumes they signed on more to ensure they are in the loop on decisions and have some degree of veto over US actions.

    This is not going down well on the left. The words had hardly left Obama’s mouth when the shills at Think Progress, led by the recent college graduate who mangles national security policy for them, were touting how snowflake-special this coalition is:

    Conservatives have already begun to pan the announcement of the core coalition, drawing unfavorable comparisons to 2003. “10 countries,” tweet Richard Grenell, who served as a spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations throughout the Bush administration, “Thrown together. Bush had 48.” Brian Faughman, who works with the LIBRE Initiative, added, “Obama ‘coalition’ approach much narrower than Bush’s ‘go-it-alone.’” While there are clearly some overlaps between the two groups, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, Denmark and Poland, the “core” group lined up against ISIS has a few advantages over those assembled in 2003.

    In 2003, Germany and France were both strongly opposed to action in Iraq, depriving the U.S. of key support in Europe. Adding in those countries gives the group the support of two of the most militarily powerful states in Europe. Canada’s support adds to the cohesion among the most capable members of NATO and Ottawa’s support will also translate over into the G-7. Most strikingly, the group announced on Friday includes Turkey, which not only neighbors Iraq but serves as a Muslim-majority country that can be put forward as a defense against claims that the campaign against ISIS isn’t yet another Western invasion of a Muslim country.

    So far, a number of countries named on Friday have already begun to take action against ISIS. “Some of them, including Britain, France and Canada, have already participated in humanitarian airdrops to Iraqi communities besieged by Islamic State forces and have delivered weapons to the Iraqi military or Kurdish fighters in northern Iraq,” the Washington Post notes. “Germany has said it will also supply weapons.” A U.S. official also pointed out that “certain countries bring specific expertise, like Britain and Australia in special operations, Jordan in intelligence, Turkey in border control and Saudi Arabia in financing.”.

    Of course, this is nonsense. None of the “coalition” members have unique expertise in anything. Worse than that none of them have enough airframes to make a meaningful contribution to humanitarian issues. Absent troops sent in to actively advise and train Syrian, Peshmerga, and Iraqi units the special forces expertise of both Britain and Australia in superfluous. Turkey’s expertise in “border control” has to be a joke at the expense of the WaPo reporter as does Saudi Arabia’s — which along with Jordan has not joined the effort — in “financing.” France is along to protect its financial stake in the Iraqi oil fields.

    Essentially, Obama is in much worse shape for the fight against ISIS than Bush was for the war against Iraq. Where, at least, the nations contributing troops in 2003 did something useful, even if not on a large scale, the coalition Obama has assembled is rather equal parts impotence and window dressing. He has replaced the Coalition of the Willing with the Coalition of the Useless.

  72. Greta lists a number of examples where FOX News was pressured by the Obama Administration to not report the story on Benghazi. They were excluded from major CIA and Administration briefings on the subject with all other news outlets. Presumably they wanted people who would not ask probing questions, and would gladly tow the party line. And when one of their reporters revealed that the rescue troops had been ordered to stand down, an Obama operative called her and demanded that she pressure that reporter into retracting the story. Greta felt this was “dirty” and refused to do it. They were harassed and intimidated for doing their job and reporting the news.

    Seriously, and with no bullshit:

    How can anyone in their right mind who knows what is going on have any respect for the big media lap dogs who pretend to be journalists, in particular, NBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NYT, WashPo.

    Oh, the conservatives get it. But what about the rest of the country.

    As I have said so many times before, the answer is this:

    1. Big media is corrupt– beyond redemption–thanks to the inaction of elder statesmen like Browkaw, and–

    2. Today’s average voter is a child– hungry for freebees and terrified by imaginary things that go bump in the night

  73. Gee, Common Core school standards appear to be more interesting than what we remember in class:

    http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/09/07/teacher-pleads-guilty-giving-15-year-old-boy-birthday-lap-dance-front-class/

    Teacher pleads guilty to giving 15-year-old boy birthday lap dance in front of class

    Smith claimed that she was coaxed into the four-minute dance by the boy’s classmates. As distressing as is that notion is, one has to wonder what possessed the teacher to capitulate — and to do so with gusto:

    According to a probable cause affidavit, the educator gave an energetic performance (which was videotaped by one student).

    When the boy entered her classroom, Smith “grabbed a chair and placed it next to her desk,” investigators reported. With music playing, Smith sat on the teen’s lap “with her buttocks making contact with his penis while she began to move back and forth.” Smith also “fondled him with her hands by touching him all over his body.” Cops noted that the assorted contact caused the boy to “have an erected penis.

    During a police interview, the teenager admitted that he “slapped Ms. Smith buttocks a few times.” At the dance’s conclusion, Smith “got on her two knees and placed her head between” the boy’s legs, police charged. As she hugged the birthday boy, Smith said, “I love you baby, Happy Birthday.”

    While Smith remains licensed to teach English Language Arts and Reading in grades 4 through 8, Texas state records note that she is “currently under review” by the State Board for Educator Certification’s professional discipline unit.

    If there is a positive side to this story, it is that the lap dance was in lieu of birthday cupcakes. Score that a win for Michelle Obama.

    Those students deserve A+ in their “persuasive speech” class if they really talked the teacher into this particular form of developmental pedagogy.

  74. AP Reporter in bed with Obama’s CIA

    Is this okay? Is this better?

    Disgusting.

    What would he say in response?

    I cannot afford to alienate them.

    If I do that, then they will no longer talk to me.

    And I will be out of business.

    May Be.

    But if all he does is parrot the party line, what does that make him?

    Useless? Well, yes.

    But worse than that really.

    It make him a fraud, who flies under the false colors of being a journalist.

    It isn’t that big media is corrupt that shocks me.

    It is the degree of corruption that should cause people to wonder

    Whether anything they say is true.

    There is no question about that in my mind.

    I hope that Sharyl’s upcoming book blows whatever is left of their tattered facade.

    The following is by a hero of mine, Glenn Greenwald, an honest man of the left:
    —————————-

    A prominent national security reporter for the Los Angeles Times (now with AP) routinely submitted drafts and detailed summaries of his stories to CIA press handlers prior to publication, according to documents obtained by The Intercept.

    Email exchanges between CIA public affairs officers and Ken Dilanian, now an Associated Press intelligence reporter who previously covered the CIA for the Times, show that Dilanian enjoyed a closely collaborative relationship with the agency, explicitly promising positive news coverage and sometimes sending the press office entire story drafts for review prior to publication. In at least one instance, the CIA’s reaction appears to have led to significant changes in the story that was eventually published in the Times.

    “I’m working on a story about congressional oversight of drone strikes that can present a good opportunity for you guys,” Dilanian wrote in one email to a CIA press officer, explaining that what he intended to report would be “reassuring to the public” about CIA drone strikes. In another, after a series of back-and-forth emails about a pending story on CIA operations in Yemen, he sent a full draft of an unpublished report along with the subject line, “does this look better?” In another, he directly asks the flack: “You wouldn’t put out disinformation on this, would you?”

    Dilanian’s emails were included in hundreds of pages of documents that the CIA turned over in response to two FOIA requests seeking records on the agency’s interactions with reporters. They include email exchanges with reporters for the Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and other outlets. In addition to Dilanian’s deferential relationship with the CIA’s press handlers, the documents show that the agency regularly invites journalists to its McLean, Va., headquarters for briefings and other events. Reporters who have addressed the CIA include the Washington Post‘s David Ignatius, the former ombudsmen for the New York Times, NPR, and Washington Post, and Fox News’ Brett Baier, Juan Williams, and Catherine Herridge.

    Dilanian left the Times to join the AP last May, and the emails released by the CIA only cover a few months of his tenure at the Times. They show that in June 2012, shortly after 26 members of congress wrote a letter to President Obama saying they were “deeply concerned” about the drone program, Dilanian approached the agency about story that he pitched as “a good opportunity” for the government.

    The letter from lawmakers, which was sent in the wake of a flurry of drone strikes that had reportedly killed dozens of civilians, suggested there was no meaningful congressional oversight of the program. But Dilanian wrote that he had been “told differently by people I trust.” He added:

    Not only would such a story be reassuring to the public, I would think, but it would also be an opportunity to explore the misinformation about strikes that sometimes comes out of local media reports. It’s one thing for you to say three killed instead of 15, and it’s another for congressional aides from both parties to back you up. Part of what the story will do, if you could help me bring it to fruition, is to quote congressional officials saying that great care is taken to avoid collateral damage and that the reports of widespread civilian casualties are simply wrong.

    Of course, journalists routinely curry favor with government sources (and others) by falsely suggesting that they intend to amplify the official point of view. But the emails show that Dilanian really meant it.

    Over the next two weeks, he sent additional emails requesting assistance and information from the agency. In one, he suggested that a New America Foundation report alleging that drone attacks had killed many civilians was exaggerated, writing that the report was “all wrong, correct?”

    A number of early news accounts reported that more than a dozen people died in the June 4, 2012, drone strike that killed Al Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi in Pakistan. But in a June 20 email to the CIA, Dilanian shared a sentence from his story draft asserting that al-Libi had died alone. “Would you quibble with this?” he asked the CIA press officer.

  75. Question: what better diagnosis of this Potemkin Village President could there possibly be than this? And it comes with a Mirandaized confession:
    —————

    President Obama on the poor optics of rushing off to make tee time immediately after his public statement about James Foley:

    “I should’ve anticipated the OPTICS,” Obama said in an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” set to air Sunday.
    “Part of this job is also the theater of it,” Obama said, adding that “it’s not something that always comes naturally to me. But it matters.”

    The president has to mentally remind himself of the “theater” of his job and how the visuals will play out – even when an American is brutally killed at the hands of a barbarically terrifying and ever-increasing enemy that has thrown the nation into a tailspin of shock and outrage. It requires “theater”: acting, rehearsing lines, a consideration of the visual presentation, including physical gestures, facial expressions, assessing and weighing out what and how every little move might be received – even though, in this case, no real gauging of the audience was necessary because an already expected and natural reaction had made itself known – we didn’t need to act.

    Without a doubt, this lead actor knew the immense seriousness and weight of the story because both script and audience had already made it very, very clear. And when one proves shockingly unable to understand or grasp, while in the hot spotlight and all eyes are on him, what is appropriate to the scene, the actor must dig deeper and work harder to make sure he conveys at least the illusion of understanding to his expectant audience. Clearly, in this, the actor missed his mark.

  76. Years ago, I served as chairman of an industry coalition of cattlemen. We were planning a major event in Fort Worth, near the old stockyards. I was speaking with a well recognized Rodeo announcer, who reminded you of the fine actor Sam Elliott–handlebar mustache, cowboy hat and all. After I briefed him on what we had in mind, he looked me in the eye and said:

    I will support you all the way.

    BUT DON’T ASK ME TO DO ANYTHING.

    Whereupon, I asked him, in that case, what do you mean by support?

    A couple months ago, a neocon named Daniel Pipes held a highly informative seminar inside the beltway on the threat posed to the western world, and the concomitant need for the nation to wake up. The panel of experts was impressive. Nevertheless, it was sparsely attended by journalists.

    In the course of those proceedings, there came a point when a Muslim woman dressed in ethnic garb rose to speak. She condemned Pipes and the panel for arranging such a meeting. She said that it was a tacit indictment of all Muslims around the world. She assured the group that it was only a fraction of the Muslims who believe in the Caliphate, Sharia Law and murdering westerners. She was a leftist plant, judging by the follow-up reporting on their blogs, which focused not on the content of the meeting, but on how this little peace loving woman was treating.

    In my view, she got the treatment she deserved, from one of the panelists, a Lebanese Christian woman who had lost her family to the terrorist, dismissed her politically correct multicultural rant. She said you madam, I take you at your word that you are peace loving. And do not doubt that millions of Muslims around the world do not support the Caliphate etc. But you are irrelevant. Indeed, your are just as irrelevant as the millions of good Germans who did not support Hitler. The problem is there is a large enough minority who do, they have a bias for action, and what do you do to stop them? Nothing.

    I feel the same way about the RINO, and many who now tell us that they do not like Obama. Where were all of you at the moment of decision, when it mattered. Ex post facto regrets are just noise.

  77. Wow. Boehner has grown a set of brass balls. He has said Obama’s illegal action on amnesty is “raw politics”.

    Raw politics?

    Those words are deeply offensive to my sensibilities.

    They should never be said in front of children.

    They could also scare the horses.

    Someone should wash his mouth out with soap.

    The problem is, knowing John, it is more likely to be Johnny Walker black.

    This is leadership?

    Give me a break.

  78. Several articles in Politico are shifting the blame from Obama to others. This article in Politico however places the blame where it belongs:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/barack-obama-immigration-executive-order-delay-110670.html?hp=f2

    Obama disappoints, again

    President Barack Obama has one person to blame for looking indecisive, dithering and cowed by bungled political calculations: Barack Obama.

    He’s the one, after all, who strode into the Rose Garden on June 30 to announce that America couldn’t wait forever on immigration reform and pledging to move forward with a set of executive actions “before the end of summer.” He’s the one who spent that afternoon lighting into Republicans in Congress for punting and punting and punting again.

    Now he’s the one punting.

    Obama, appearing on “Meet the Press,” attributed his decision to punt immigration reform action until after Election Day to making “sure that the t’s are crossed and the i’s are dotted,” or “getting all our ducks in a row,” on the legal side and needing to spend some more time explaining himself to the American public.

    This is a reoccurring theme for Obama: repeatedly delivering bold speeches that set dazzlingly high bars for action, then slowly backpedaling into a muddle and letting the issue — and his poll numbers — fade away.

    From his 2008 campaign pledge to ban lobbyists in his administration to the speech he gave at the Newtown memorial service saying he was finally going to do something significant about gun control, Saturday’s announcement was another little splinter in the heartbreak for many Obama true believers.

    “When candidate Obama asked our community for support in 2008 and 2012, he urged us all to vote based on our hopes, not our fears,” said Janet Murguía, president and CEO of the National Council of La Raza. “Today, President Obama gave in to the fears of Democratic political operatives, crushing the hopes of millions of hard-working people living under the constant threat of deportation and family separation.” [snip]

    Even before Saturday morning, the feckless narrative was renewed last week with his “we don’t have a strategy yet” on ISIL line as he, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel have all seemed to express different versions of how to confront the Islamic State threat.

    “It is a small example of the actual promise of his presidency, which was to change the way business was done, to make people feel like this country was working for them,” said one frustrated Democratic strategist. “People are just giving up.”

    The White House argues that the blame shouldn’t fall solely on Obama’s shoulders. [snip]

    The White House spent Saturday trying to reassure immigration advocates and other disappointed supporters: it’s not that Obama’s given up on the executive actions, it’s that he didn’t want his wading into the immigration fight to get blamed for Democrats losing the Senate and setting back the overall cause of getting reform.

    The executive actions are still coming, officials say, with the timetable moved from “before the end of the summer” to before the end of the year. [snip]

    Even as a matter of political tactics, there’s a level of resignation to being exasperated with the White House, which has chalked up the change of course in part to the fallout from the unaccompanied minors border crisis over the summer.

    “The truth of the matter is that the politics did shift midsummer because of that problem,” Obama said in the “Meet the Press” interview.

    But it’s not as if the White House wasn’t aware of the crisis when Obama threw down the gauntlet in the Rose Garden: the first half of his remarks that afternoon was devoted to addressing the situation and initial steps he was directing his administration to take in response.

    It’s also not as if they weren’t aware then that control of the Senate was going to hinge on a whole swath of red-state Democrats scratching out narrow wins in electorates where immigration reform isn’t all that popular — and a president resetting national policy on his own is even less so. [snip]

    Immediately after the president spoke that afternoon in the Rose Garden, Obama aides were already signaling that their definition of “end of the summer” didn’t necessarily align with wall calendars or the tilt of the Earth’s axis. But rather than dangling the threat of executive actions another week or two to try baiting Republicans into picking up the impeachment or shutdown talk, by announcing the move Saturday, the damage landed all on him without aiming for a maneuver that could have caused some damage to the other side.

    That’s the other side of the Obama disappointment — the feeling of a total disconnect between his sweeping rhetoric and the political practicalities involved in delivering on that rhetoric.

    Anyone have a few tears to spare for these heartbroken Messiah Obama dreamers as they find themselves unable to awake from their Hopium nightmares?

  79. Admin, what is the status of the plaintiffs appeal to the SC of the Fourth Circuit court’s decision? Can’t seem to find any updates on that.

  80. Here you go Tony Stark – hot off the presses:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/387059/king-cert-petition-delayed-carrie-severino

    The Supreme Court just granted the government an additional 30 days to respond to the cert petition in King v. Burwell, the case challenging IRS attempts to expand Obamacare subsidies to states that didn’t set up exchanges.

    As I wrote earlier, the speed with which the King plaintiffs filed their cert petition meant that the Supreme Court could vote on whether or not to take up the case as early as October. Now that the court has granted an extension, that moves the likely date of consideration to November, by my count. While that still allows ample time for the Court to fit the case onto this term’s schedule, it increases the likelihood that the D.C. Circuit will have already decided whether or not to hear Halbig v. Burwell – the case decided almost simultaneously with King that came to the opposite conclusion.

    This morning’s decision by the D.C. Circuit to hear Halbig en banc will likely trigger more attempts at delay by the government. They would argue, as they did in their application for an extension, that a final determination in Halbig is needed before the Court can decide whether or not to take King for oral argument. It’s possible the justices would agree, since the Court frequently declines to consider issues that have not created a split in the lower courts. But, as I have argued, King addresses an issue significant enough that the Court should take it even if Halbig is reversed. Uncertainty about the availability of subsidies in 36 states is not only terribly unsettling to the health-care industry, but affects millions of Americans who must make health-care decisions without knowing what their premiums really will be going forward. And there are other cases working their way through the courts which are expected to find the IRS rule at issue unlawful, just as Halbig did, so it seems likely the case will be decided by the High Court eventually.

    The IRS’s attempt to rewrite Obamacare itself is yet another example of the disregard for the rule of law that has become the hallmark of this administration, prompting the Court to take an unusually strong stand against its extreme legal positions in a number of cases. This case provides another opportunity for the Court to embrace its role as the defender of our constitutional checks and balances.

  81. admin

    September 7, 2014 at 5:18 pm

    Anyone have a few tears to spare for these heartbroken Messiah Obama dreamers as they find themselves unable to awake from their Hopium nightmares?

    I do. You know those tears that come out when you’ve been laughing so hard your back hurts? I could spare some of those…..

    Hillary 2016

  82. Lu4PUMA
    September 7, 2014 at 4:02 pm
    What’s this on the rehearing on Halbig? Does this mean it may not go to the USSC?
    —————
    I am 80% sure they will not take the case.

    And 100% sure they should—if they believe the Constitution means anything.

    Chief Justice Roberts is too weak for the job.

  83. Tony Start, one more point. After the government files its reply on October 3 the petitioners have 14 days to file their response. If they once again act with lightning speed they might file on October 5. This would give the high court the opportunity to discuss the case and vote to grant or not grant cert by the end of October. After than comes oral argument then a decision by the end of the term.

    While all this is happening the 10th Circuit might issue a decision knocking down the subsidies (this is the circuit that ruled for Hobby Lobby). So even if the D.C. Circuit en banc overturns its three judge panel decision there might soon be another decision which splits the circuits and makes a SC decision necessary. In either case by the time the SC has a conference on whether to grant cert on King there will still be a split in the circuits because there won’t be an Halbig decision until next year at the appeals level.

  84. You can see how the judicial branch operates today by the reversal of the DC circuit.

    The Constitution has been reduced to a hollow shibboleth by partisans who want it destroyed and supposed guardians who are too cowardly to defend it. Roberts is the epitome of what is wrong.

    Red skies at night.
    Sailors delight.
    Red skies at morn.
    Sailor be warned.

    Red skies at night.
    Roberts acts like a judge.
    Red skies at morn.
    He takes a powder–just like Obama.

    There is your weak link.
    Scalia, Kennedy, Alito and Thomas would vote to take the case.
    All it takes is 3.
    But if the case is taken and Roberts defects like he did before.
    They will not take it.
    And I am pretty damned sure he will tell them that.

  85. Yes, I know there are a lot of pieces to the puzzle. And when the Obama packed DC circuit violates the law and holds for the government, another circuit could go the other way, in which case there would be another conflict in the circuits. All I am saying is this: with Roberts as chief justice, they will not hear the case. The man is too damned weak. At the end of the day, the law means nothing. It is all just politics. And Roberts hasn’t the spine to defend the Constitution. If this were Las Vegas, I would give long odds. Granted, there are those who will tell you he will wait until next year and then develop some testicular fortitude. Does a cat bark???

  86. Roberts is a vain man and a weak one. He worries more about the perception of the court by the elites, than what he should be worrying about which is the Constitution and the country. Well we have seen his kind before, as far back as Pontius Pilate.

  87. Anyone who wants to keep a candle burning in the hope that Roberts will grow a pair is welcome to do so. But life is too short for me to engage in such a delusion. I rely heavily on stories about him from law clerks. How he practically had a nervous breakdown when the Obamacare case first hit the transom. He was goofy. One minute he wanted to side with the conservatives. Then he went blatto. Justice Kennedy had to sit with him and try to talk him off the ledge speaking metaphorically. It did not good. But when he fell through his ass, it left many people to speculate on the reasons, and wonder what form of coercion was applied. As far as I am concerned, it is a Occums Razor, meaning he cannot take the heat.

  88. wbboei

    The initial decision on Deathcare was obviously too charged for Roberts to stand up. As a matter of law, it should have been killed. He had to have had alot of negative feedback on his cowardice. And people are less keen on the law now and this issue is lower profile. It should take less courage to nix it. The chances of him standing up now are better.

  89. Lu4PUMA
    September 7, 2014 at 9:05 pm
    ———
    Hope you are right.

    But what I see is a historical figure.

    More of a Horatio Gates than a John Marshall.

    If I ever meet him, I will tell him that.

    Gates led Continental forces and militia south and prepared to face the British forces of Charles Cornwallis, who had advanced to Camden, South Carolina.

    Gates was a general in the Continental Army in the Revolutionary War. He was politically ambitious. He lost the Battle of Camden. 1000 of his men were captured. Whereupon he turned bright yellow yellow. He fled the battlefield on horseback to the safety of Washington. He covered 170 miles in record time. Thereafter a Board of Inquiry was formed. He opposed that action, even though he had recommended if for other generals as a prelude to a General Court Marshall. But he wormed his way out of it, just like you know who.

  90. This is more than likely going to destroy Obama’s Presidency, his decision to remove troops is directly responsible.

    How this affects Hillary’s run in 2016 is going to be anybody’s guess..

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/world/middleeast/destroying-isis-may-take-3-years-white-house-says.html?_r=0

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is preparing to carry out a campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria that may take three years to complete, requiring a sustained effort that could last until after President Obama has left office, according to senior administration officials.

    The first phase, an air campaign with nearly 145 airstrikes in the past month, is already underway to protect ethnic and religious minorities and American diplomatic, intelligence and military personnel, and their facilities, as well as to begin rolling back ISIS gains in northern and western Iraq.

    The next phase, which would begin sometime after Iraq forms a more inclusive government, scheduled this week, is expected to involve an intensified effort to train, advise or equip the Iraqi military, Kurdish fighters and possibly members of Sunni tribes.
    Continue reading the main story
    Related Coverage

    A Kurdish fighter near a checkpoint west of Erbil, Iraq, on Sunday. In Anbar Province, control of the Haditha Dam was at stake.
    U.S. Launches New Airstrikes on ISIS to Protect Dam in IraqSEPT. 7, 2014
    With Schools Doubling as Shelters in Northern Iraq, Classes WaitSEPT. 7, 2014
    Times Topic: Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)

    The final, toughest and most politically controversial phase of the operation — destroying the terrorist army in its sanctuary inside Syria — might not be completed until the next administration. Indeed, some Pentagon planners envision a military campaign lasting at least 36 months.
    Continue reading the main story
    Graphic: The Iraq-ISIS Conflict in Maps, Photos and Video

    Mr. Obama will use a speech to the nation on Wednesday to make his case for launching a United States-led offensive against Sunni militants gaining ground in the Middle East, seeking to rally support for a broad military mission while reassuring the public that he is not plunging American forces into another Iraq war.

    “What I want people to understand,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” that was broadcast Sunday, “is that over the course of months, we are going to be able to not just blunt the momentum” of the militants. “We are going to systematically degrade their capabilities; we’re going to shrink the territory that they control; and, ultimately, we’re going to defeat them,” he added.

    The military campaign Mr. Obama is preparing has no obvious precedent. Unlike American counterterrorism operations in Yemen and Pakistan, it is not expected to be limited to drone strikes against militant leaders. Unlike the war in Afghanistan, it will not include the use of ground troops, which Mr. Obama has ruled out.

    Unlike the Kosovo war that President Bill Clinton and NATO nations waged in 1999, it will not be compressed into an intensive 78-day tactical and strategic air campaign. And unlike during the air campaign that toppled the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, in 2011, the Obama administration is no longer “leading from behind,” but plans to play the central role in building a coalition to counter ISIS.

    “We have the ability to destroy ISIL,” Secretary of State John Kerry said last week at the NATO summit meeting in Wales, using an alternative name for the militant group. “It may take a year, it may take two years, it may take three years. But we’re determined it has to happen.”

    Antony J. Blinken, Mr. Obama’s deputy national security adviser, has suggested that the United States is undertaking a prolonged mission. “It’s going to take time, and it will probably go beyond even this administration to get to the point of defeat,” Mr. Blinken said last week on CNN.
    Continue reading the main story

    Mr. Kerry is scheduled to head for the Middle East soon to solidify the anti-ISIS coalition. And Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is traveling to Ankara, Turkey, on Monday to woo another potential ally in the fight against the Sunni militant group.

    Although details of how the emerging coalition would counter ISIS remain undecided, several American officials said that they believe the list of allies so far includes Jordan, offering intelligence help, and Saudi Arabia, which has influence with Sunni tribes in Iraq and Syria and which has been funding moderate Syrian rebels.

    The United Arab Emirates, officials said, has also indicated a willingness to consider airstrikes in Iraq. Germany has said it would send arms to pesh merga fighters in Kurdistan. And rising concern over foreign fighters returning home from Syria and Iraq may also have spurred Australia, Britain, Denmark and France to join the alliance.

    Administration officials acknowledged, however, that getting those same countries to agree to airstrikes in Syria was proving harder.
    Continue reading the main story
    Interactive Graphic: A Rogue State Along Two Rivers

    “Everybody is on board Iraq,” an administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the policy is still being developed. “But when it comes to Syria, there’s more concern” about where airstrikes could lead. The official nonetheless expressed confidence that the countries would eventually come around to taking the fight into Syria, in part, he said, because “there’s really no other alternative.”

    The talks between Mr. Hagel and the Turkish leadership may be crucial in determining whether the United States will be able to count on Ankara on a number of fronts, including closing the Turkish border to foreign fighters who have been using Turkey as a transit point from which to go to Syria and Iraq to join militant organizations and allowing the American military to carry out operations from bases in Turkey.

    But Turkish officials have been wary of attracting notice from ISIS, given that the group holds the fate of 49 kidnapped Turkish diplomats in its hands. In June, Sunni militants with ISIS stormed the Turkish Consulate in Mosul, Iraq, kidnapping the consul general and other members of his staff, and their families, including three children.
    Continue reading the main story
    Recent Comments
    bb
    59 minutes ago

    I just watched “Good Morning Vietnam” again. Seems like we have not come very far other then more wars and more expense. And it seems here…
    Thomas Payne
    59 minutes ago

    This is nothing new. What did George W. Bush say about the “War on Terror?” Something to the effect that it would “never be won.”
    djohnwick
    59 minutes ago

    Three years for Obama to make a decision? Three years meaning Obama will not finish this thing? Is Obama also going to tell ISIS what his…

    See All Comments
    Write a comment

    Mr. Obama’s planned speech suggests he may be moving closer to a decision on many remaining questions, including whether and at what point the White House might widen the air campaign to include targets across the border in Syria, possibly to include ISIS leadership and its equipment, supply depots and command centers. The time of the speech on Wednesday has not been announced.

    Senior officials have repeatedly ruled out sending ground combat troops, a vow Mr. Obama reaffirmed in his appearance on “Meet the Press.”

    “This is not going to be an announcement about U.S. ground troops,” he said. “This is not the equivalent of the Iraq war.”

    But it is not clear if that declaration would preclude the eventual deployment of small numbers of American Special Operations forces or C.I.A. operatives to call in airstrikes on behalf of Kurdish fighters, Iraqi forces or Sunni tribes, a procedure that makes it much easier to distinguish between ISIS militants, civilians and counter ISIS fighters.
    Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
    Continue reading the main story

    During the recent operation to retake the Mosul Dam, Kurdish soldiers, using a more roundabout procedure, provided the coordinates of ISIS fighters to the joint United States-Kurdish command center in Erbil, which in turn passed them to American aircraft, Masrour Barzani, the head of Kurdish intelligence, said in a recent interview.

    The White House is counting on an effort by American, Iraqi and Gulf Arab officials to persuade Sunni tribesman in western Iraq, now aligned with ISIS, to break their ties after chafing under the harsh Shariah law the group has imposed.

    Unless the new Iraqi government is substantially more inclusive, American encouragement and support for these groups to turn on ISIS may be far less effective than it was in 2007, when many tribes fought the forerunner of ISIS, Al Qaeda in Iraq.

    Some Sunni tribal leaders are still bitter at the treatment under former Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, a Shiite.

    “Even if they try we will not accept it,” said Sheikh Ali Hatem Suleimani, a tribal leader in Anbar who lives in Erbil. “In the past, we fought against Al Qaeda and we cleaned the area of them. But the Americans gave control of Iraq to Maliki, who started to arrest, kill, and exile most of the tribal commanders who led the fight against Al Qaeda.”

  91. moononpluto

    September 7, 2014 at 11:57 pm
    ———–
    Obviously, the decision has been taken out of the hands of this incompetent half wit. This Potemkin President, this glib half wit, this loon snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, and created a power vacuum across the middle east. In Libya, he did the exact same thing as Bush did in Iraq, by overthrowing a secular leader who could keep the religious fanatics under control. In Iraq, the turned a military victory into a strategic defeat by failing to achieve a status of forces agreement on withdrawal, and hanging with a flawed leader for too long. He promoted a terrorist organization called the Muslim Brotherhood and gave them offices in the White House itself. He signaled to Iran that it is okay for them to develop the bomb even though they have threatened to use it to exterminate Israel and at the same time he has restrained Israel from taking the necessary steps to protect itself from that threat. And he has projected a level of weakness unbecoming an American President, and lethal to our position as a world leader. I shudder to think of the lives this bastard will cost both abroad and here. My worry is that by the end of the day, the Messiah will get everyone killed.

  92. The New York Times does not need to produce a long tedious article like the one above. They have a bad habit of lying, and taking the administration talking points. This information is totally useless, and I have a strong suspicion that it is an effort to hide what they have done to create this deteriorating situation, by refusing to tell us the truth at an earlier stage where lives could have been saved and it would not take 3 years to exterminate ISIS. In government speak 3 years means a minimum of 10 years, and there will come a point where the New York Times snatches defeat from the jaws of this victory. We saw this with Cuba, Viet Nam and Iraq. What they always seem to project is what Mahan called a short little war, a march up San Juan hill, and when we get bogged down, these cocksuckers are the first to run, and when they run, they take the rest of the country with them.

  93. If you think this assessment is over the top, then think back to the article I posted on the AP reporter, whom Glenn Greenwald shows emails from which show that far from reporting the truth, he was collaborating with the Obama CIA to convey their talking points to the public exactly the way the Administration wanted. That is true of AP and it is equally true of New York Times. When the relationship with the White House becomes this incestuous, then they are reduced from reporter to stenographer, and there is no point reading their tripe. Mostly, it is an effort to manipulate public opinion to a political result which the White House is seeking, and covering up their own lies, mistakes and miscalculations. And if that is generally true in most situations today, it is particularly true of the New York Times and AP. Two eminently impeachable sources of propaganda, as opposed to truth.

  94. Whats painfully clear is that Obama intends to leave a mess for whoever succeeds him.

    Why am I not surprised.

  95. Because the situation with ISIS is too horrifying for a reasonable person to process, I choose to objectify it and view it as The Sociopath Project. What O has successfully done is to give the sociopaths of the world a chance to unite, slaughter, rape and murder people under a religious mantra. What better than a religion of aggression and violence, taken to another level, to give sociopaths an opportunity to act out?

    Now, if we could just get them all herded into an appropriate prison where Obama cannot release them all again.

  96. Interesting article from Daily Beast advancing the premise that classism is a bigger issue than racism in America today.

    _______________

    U.S. NEWS 09.07.14

    Class Issues, Not Race, Will Likely Seal the Next Election

    Race is always a hot button topic in the U.S., but rising and rampant economic inequality will likely be the issue that propels people to the voting booth.
    Recent events in Ferguson, Missouri and along the U.S.-Mexico border may seem to suggest that race has returned as the signature issue in American politics. We can see this already in the pages of mainstream media, with increased calls for reparations for African-Americans, and expanded amnesties for the undocumented. Increasingly, any opposition to Obama’s policies is blamed on deep-seated white racism.

    Yet in reality, race will not define the 2014 election, or likely those that follow. Instead the real defining issue—class—does not fit so easily into the current political calculus. In terms of racial justice, we have made real progress since the ’60s, when even successful educated minorities were discriminated against and the brightest minority students were often discouraged from attending college. Today an African-American holds the highest office in the land, and African Americans also fill the offices of U.S. attorney general and national security advisor. This makes the notion that race thwarts success increasingly outdated.

    But at the same time that formal racial barriers have been demolished, the class divide continues to grow steeper than in at any time in the nation’s recent history. Today America’s class structure is increasingly ossified, and this affects not only minorities, who are hit disproportionately, but also many whites, who constitute more than 40 percent of the nation’s poor. Upward mobility has stalled under both Bush and Obama, not only for minorities but for vast swaths of working class and middle class Americans. Increasingly, it’s not the color of one’s skin that determines one’s place in society, but access to education and capital, often the inherited variety.

    Worries about upward mobility have been mounting for a generation, and according to Pew, only one-third of Americans currently believe the next generation will do better than them. Indeed, in some surveys pessimism about the next generation stands at an all-time high.

    But race is not the main determinant in looking to the future. The greatest dismay, in fact, is felt among working class and middle class whites, who are generally much more pessimistic about the future for themselves than are either African-Americans or Hispanics.

    (snip)
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/07/class-issues-not-race-will-likely-seal-the-next-election.html

  97. Every now and then I step back and question my assumptions.

    Today is surely one of those days.

    The catalyst was the article by Professor Victor Davis Hanson/

    Which might be called–the banality of evil, 21st century style.

    The political class has been largely indifferent to the slaughter of innocents.

    It took the beheading of two journalists on television to cause them alarm.

    And why is that?

    If it is an article of faith among western elites that every life is precious

    Why is it that the death of two western journalists be any more of a moral outrage

    That the wholesale slaughter of innocent Christians en masse

    Which is hardly noticed by this Muslim president and his fellow travelers

    The answer lies in that old saying–there but for the grace of god goeth I

    And the phony patriotism bantered about by the commedian turned Caesar Joe Biden

    Ripples now through the political class

    Which heretofore has compelled them to put nothing on the line

    And sat back and said oh dear oh dear

    Yes it is dreadful, but not worth jeopardizing our own life of privilege

    Is now finally scared and is displaying that phony patriotism

    Which is the last bastion of scoundrels

    Compels them to put nothing on the line which might jeopardize their comfortable lifestyle

    Which leads me to the point which I wish to make

    Concerning the possibility that I have been wrong in seeing Obama as an anomoly

    Meaning a rogue figure who is a blight on this nation.

    What terrifies me now is the distinct possibility that he is not an anomoly at all

    But is, instead, an accurate reflection of everything that is wrong with this society

    And everything that we have become

  98. freespirit
    September 8, 2014 at 10:17 am

    The class issue was clear to anyone who wished to look and see it in the Democratic Party in 2007-2008. Progressives see themselves as a class apart by reason of wealth, education, region, connections or some unique talent they have that only to which only they are privy (creative class). It is not a meritocracy. They openly espouse that they and only they should do well economically and anyone else deserves to do worse. They think the poor and middle class deserve to do worse because they are not one of them. There are a many who go along with them who hope for a little slice of the pie. Selfishness, insecurity, laziness, ignorance and hubris drive them. They are afraid of the other classes because they cannot compete without advantage.

  99. Mormaer

    They are afraid of the other classes because they cannot compete without advantage.

    __________________

    Yes. And, they have stereotyped some ethnicities within the other classes, both in this country and in others, as perpetually oppressed, providing the elite progressives with a cause. It’s kind of their default. Without a cause, their existence might really seem pathetic – even to them. Trouble is, they perpetuate the myths that serve them. In their writings, in their speeches, in their small gatherings, they keep old stereotypes alive, lamenting the injustices that never, in their world view, ceases.

    That’s not to say that racism has been eradicated, but gains have been made in terms of racial equality. We do have a half-African American pretend president.
    Their high-dollar educations misguide their efforts.

  100. freespirit

    September 7, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    S, I always appreciate kind and encouraging words. I think you meant to address them to FOXY, in this case.
    *******************************

    Foxy…forgive me…I hope all is well…it goes double for you…cannot keep a freespirit down…or a Foxyladi with a freespirit…

    sending you good vibes…

  101. Mormaer
    September 8, 2014 at 11:26 am
    freespirit
    September 8, 2014 at 10:17 am
    The class issue was clear to anyone who wished to look and see it in the Democratic Party in 2007-2008. Progressives see themselves as a class apart by reason of wealth, education, region, connections or some unique talent they have that only to which only they are privy (creative class). It is not a meritocracy. They openly espouse that they and only they should do well economically and anyone else deserves to do worse. They think the poor and middle class deserve to do worse because they are not one of them. There are a many who go along with them who hope for a little slice of the pie. Selfishness, insecurity, laziness, ignorance and hubris drive them. They are afraid of the other classes because they cannot compete without advantage.
    —————-
    Brilliant.

    Reminds me of what one of our early bloggers said about the seven years ago, i.e. Paddy4Hill–if anyone here remembers her. She was living in China at the time, and could see things from that vantage point, because too many of us–me particularly, were too close to the forest to see the trees.

    As your comments suggests, as the seven deadly sins go, the progressive is guilty of all fourteen of them. In the state of nature, they would not last long. Some enterprising carnivore would eat them for lunch. Many of them were the same paragons of moral virtue who marched against the Viet Nam War, preached equality, and when their turn came for the brass ring managed to become the worst despots of all. For half a century they have been lying to themselves, and so for them the test of an idea is not whether it works, but whether it is new creative and exciting enough to appeal to those in their social class.

  102. When I hearken back to the Viet Nam War, and make a comment like that a friend of mine who is one of the most ethical people I know would push back. But most of them were not like her. She was coming home from a summer job as a counselor, stopped in Chicago to see what was going on with the rioting, and stood down the police on one hand and Bill Ayers on the other, so much so that after losing the argument, he called her a bitch and stormed out of the room. I was in the military at the time, but my impression was most of the protesters were looking to get high, get laid, or both. But of course you also had Ayers, Holder and others whose purpose was demonic, as opposed to hedonistic. And you had a few, very few, who marched to a higher drum, like my friend did, and still does.

  103. In the early 1950’s Frankie Lane did a song about the progressive we see today. It goes like this:

    This town is full of guys
    Who think they’re mighty wise,
    Just because they know a thing or two.
    You see them every day
    Walkin’ up and down Broadway,
    Telling of the wonders they can do.

    There’s con men and there’s boosters,
    Card sharks and crap-shooters.
    They congregate around the Metropole.
    They wear fancy ties and collars,
    But where do they get their dollars?
    They all have got an ace down in the hole!

    Some of them write to the old folks for coin,
    And that is their ace in the hole,
    And others have friends on the old Tenderloin;
    That’s their old ace in the hole.

    They’ll tell you of trips that they’re going to take
    From Florida to the North Pole.
    The fact is, their name would be mud,
    Like a chump playing stud,
    If they lost that old ace down in the hole!

  104. Like all aristocracies, the elites seek to perpetuate themselves through the generations. That would not be entirely objectionable IF there was some evidence that they really are that which they claim to be, namely superior people and therefore our betters. The problem is the evidence is all to the contrary, and the more they endeavor to preserve their competitive advantage, the more that national decline becomes a pre ordained certainty. Put differently, the winners of the luck sperm club have a track record of failure, and it manifests itself in what is happening to this nation.
    ——————-

    “The Democrats and many establishment Republicans, have constructed a complicated system to keep the middle class from ever competing with them and their children. The children of the rich now get massive access through their parents’ campaign donations and political involvement. The parents, in turn, through campaign donations or their positions in government, can also construct Rube Goldberg legal frameworks to keep those beneath them on the economic scale from ever advancing.

    We seem to be on the cusp of that in this country and the middle class realizes what is happening. The creators in the country who come up with the ideas, take the risks to capital and reputation, and possibly get ahead are more and more being labeled the bad guys. But there is more to it than that. The middle class is coming to terms with the idea that upholding its principles will put it at a competitive disadvantage and they are seething about it.

    Due to lobbyists, regulators, and legislators, the process of inventiveness and creativity has been shut down. The tax code and regulatory structure are too complex for a small businessman to become a big businessman. Major corporations have, through carving up the patent laws to suit themselves, made it impossible for a small business to compete creatively without running afoul of a process or software patent that never should have existed. The entire nature of the tax code for small businesses is designed to prevent capital formation and growth.”

  105. The elites enjoy a severe advantage over the rest of society which is protected by two things: i) control of our economy, through crony capitalism, which allows them to combine with government in such a way as to privatize the profits and socialize the losses of their often improvident ventures, and to prevent upward mobility through the arcane tax code, and ii) control of our politics, by owning both parties, ascribing malignant motives to those who seek to democratize the system–like the Tea Party, etc. This explains why they support Obama—he is one of them, and why they did not take notice of the rampant killing in the middle east until two journalists were killed–they were well educated, white and liberal–in essence just like them. Put differently they never think of the welfare of the nation. All they ever think of is themselves. As such, they are ill equipped to run the nation, and expect that the general welfare will be served.

  106. I am surprise that I find myself saying these things and writing about them. I believe it was Henry Adams, the son of one president and the grandson of another who argued eloquently and persuasively that it was a desirable condition for the elites to run the show because they were descendant from the founders, and not likely to take bribes. That is a plausible argument in the abstract. And, it is also seductive, in the sense that in our parent’s generation, all social classes responded to the call of the bugle. If they were gods at all, the wealthy of that generation, they were at least touchable ones, who we could respect. By today, that argument scarcely rises to the level of sophistry. The current elites are shallow, materialistic and wall themselves off from the rest of society. They are more like the aristocrats in a feudal society than in a democratic one. Meanwhile the public actually believes that salvation lies in the political system, which is more like professional wrestling than a fair and honest contest. The fate of the Habig case and the cowardice of John Roberts, dispels any notion that the courts will save our democracy.

  107. On Sunday night, Nigel Farage, the Chairman of the United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP), said that the next time Republicans prop up a “continuity, establishment candidate” for President of the United Sates, they are not going to win.

    Appearing on Breitbart News Sunday, airing at 7-10 pm ET on Sirius XM Patriot Radio and speaking with Breitbart Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon, Farage said that unless you can “energize and engage, to use an old fashioned term, the blue collar voter, you are not going to beat the Democrats.”

    Farage believes that the conservatives in America and the conservatives in the UK are fighting the same battles: runaway government expansion, exploding social welfare programs, and the immigration issues.

    The leader of UKIP says that the politics of the 80’s was about the economy. The “politics of now is the politics of nation, the politics of identity, and the politics of community.”

    It will be Romney vs Cruz in the primary.

    Cruz will kick the shit out of Romney in the debates, but the elites will see to it that Romney is the nominee. Cruz scares the hell out of them because he speaks for the American People rather than the political class, and he will not be run by consultants the way Romney is, which is why he will lose the general election to Hillary, for the reasons discussed by Nigel Farage below. The RINO has nothing to sell to the average voter. He is a pale imitation of the dimocrat, and both of them are agents for the elites, not the American People. Despite Benghazi Hillary will win and I think it will be another route of the Whig/RINO>

    NIGEL FARAGE: GOP ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATE CAN’T BEAT A DEMOCRAT FOR PRESIDENT

    On Sunday night, Nigel Farage, the Chairman of the United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP), said that the next time Republicans prop up a “continuity, establishment candidate” for President of the United Sates, they are not going to win.

    Appearing on Breitbart News Sunday, airing at 7-10 pm ET on Sirius XM Patriot Radio and speaking with Breitbart Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon, Farage said that unless you can “energize and engage, to use an old fashioned term, the blue collar voter, you are not going to beat the Democrats.”

    Farage believes that the conservatives in America and the conservatives in the UK are fighting the same battles: runaway government expansion, exploding social welfare programs, and the immigration issues.

    The leader of UKIP says that the politics of the 80’s was about the economy. The “politics of now is the politics of nation, the politics of identity, and the politics of community.”

    One of the arguments that UKIP makes, says Farage, is that the United Kingdom should have kept its “birthright to be an independent, democratic, self-governing nation.” Farage adds that England believes in a certain set of values: “We believe in democracy, we believe in the rule of law, we created the Magna Carter, these are what it means to be British.”

    Moreover, Farage says that these values have evolved over many centuries and that men have sacrificed their lives for those values in a number of wars.

    Farage believes that the UK’s entry into the European Union is a “betrayal of those who were killed in two world wars, a betrayal when we fought for independence and we fought for democracy, not just for us, but for Belgium, Poland, and the rest of Europe too. And to throw that all out of the window, to say these values don’t matter anymore, because we are going to try a new project, frankly its akin to treachery.”

  108. Sorry: that paragraph about Cruz was mine. Farage did not say it. Wish he had. I cut and pasted in the wrong spot. Some day perhaps I will get a chance to do that to the messiah, in one of his glorious speeches that has big media fainting. He would not know what he was reading, and they would assume these were his words, and praise him to no end.

  109. Some brief remarks.
    Kurtz claims Obama sort of got away with spinning amnesty timing decision. But that’s not so with my 88 year old friend Shirley. For the first time in 2 years that she and I have spoken in real time about Obama, she is LIVID.

    One of yesterday’s must include topics seemed to be:
    Respiratory Virus Hitting Kids in at Least 10 States
    In-Depth-Philly.com-15 hours ago

    But that story was killed overnight, probably in fear it would lend credence to claims that the “kids” coming through were bringing sickness with them. Here is one such concern [date 6/6/14]:
    http://www.abc15.com/news/national/immigrants-bringing-diseases-across-border

  110. I’m not a football enthusiast, but IMHO it’s about damn time this happened:

    from Guardian UK <www.guardianuk.com

    "NFL suspends running back Ray Rice over domestic violence accusation"

  111. wbb, talk about your hard to explain poll numbers. Support for O care down by 3 % since May but still at ….. 35%. Author sees this as more bad news for Dems seeking reelection.

    At this point, you just have to wonder how much more bad news it will take to put Dims totally out of the running come November..

    __________

    Support for ObamaCare continues to fall

    By Sarah Ferris – 09/09/14 09:03 AM EDT

    Public approval of ObamaCare continued to sink this summer, issuing the latest warning for vulnerable Democrats who will face voters this fall after backing the law.

    Just 35 percent of voters now support the Affordable Care Act, down 3 percentage points from May, according to a monthly poll by the Kaiser Health Foundation released on Tuesday. Support for the healthcare overhaul law once stood at 50 percent, just weeks after it was signed in 2010.

    Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/217064-support-for-obamacare-continues-to-fall#ixzz3Cp875NEA
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

  112. Starting to hit home with low info voters…..

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/poll-obama-presidency-failure-110746.html

    Poll: Majority say President Obama a failure

    A majority of voters believe Barack Obama’s presidency has been a failure, a new poll says.

    According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Tuesday, 52 percent of Americans say Obama’s presidency has been a failure, compared with 42 percent who believe it has been a success. Thirty-nine percent believe strongly that his presidency is a failure, just 3 points below his total success score.
    Continue Reading
    Text Size


    +
    reset

    Presidential highs and lows
    President Barack Obama is pictured. | AP Photo Play Slideshow

    The numbers are similar to the president’s approval rating, as reported in the survey. Fifty-one percent of Americans disapprove of Obama’s job performance, while 42 percent approve. More people disapprove than approve of Obama’s handling of the economy, implementation of the Affordable Care Act, international affairs and immigration issues.

    A majority of registered voters — 54 percent — say their feelings for Obama will not be a factor in their vote in the upcoming November midterm elections. Twenty-seven percent say their vote will express opposition to the president, while 19 percent say it will express support.

    The survey was conducted Sept. 4-7 with 1,001 adults on landlines and cellphones. The margin for error is plus or minus 3.5 points.

  113. This is not needed unless of course you want an extra senator and congressmen that would be Dem of course.

    http://weaselzippers.us/199078-dc-statehood-to-get-hearing-on-capitol-hill/

    The long-dormant debate over statehood for the District of Columbia is about to be revived on Capitol Hill.

    A Senate committee announced Monday that it will hold a hearing next week on a bill that would make the District the nation’s 51st state. Next Monday’s hearing will be the first on statehood for the nation’s capital in more than 20 years.

  114. Another Dem can kiss his seat goodbye….the idiot.

    http://weaselzippers.us/199056-dem-senator-american-journalists-beheaded-by-isis-would-have-supported-obamas-wimpy-response/

    Dem Sen. Mark Udall: American Journalists Beheaded By ISIS Would Have Supported Obama’s Wimpy Response – Update: Apologizes For Invoking Beheading Victims…

    No shame.

    “I can tell you, Steve Sotloff and James Foley would tell us, don’t be impulsive. Horrible and barbarous as those executions were, don’t be impulsive, come up with a plan to knock ISIL back.”

    HT: NRO

    Update: Idiot.

    (CBS News) – Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colorado, apologized on Monday for invoking the two American journalists beheaded by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) during his first debate matchup against Republican challenger Cory Gardner.

    “I should not have invoked the names of James Foley and Steven Sotloff,” Udall said in a statement. “It was inappropriate and I sincerely apologize.”

    Making the case that the Islamic militants don’t pose an “imminent threat” to the United States, Udall in the faceoff over the weekend said Foley and Sotloff would endorse President Obama’s precautious approach to the crisis. The reporters’ brutal beheadings were captured by ISIS on video that was distributed to the United States as a warning against interventionist strategies.

    “I can tell you, Steve Sotloff and James Foley would tell us: Don’t be impulsive,” he said. “Horrible and barbarous as those executions were, don’t be impulsive. Come up with a plan to knock [ISIS] back.”

  115. Who employs you Congressman?

    Boot him out.

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/08/california-congressman-shuts-up-his-constituent-this-is-my-forum/

    At a recent Town Hall meeting in Jurupa, Calif., when a male constituent tried to press him on his attitude toward bipartisanship he flipped his lid.

    As Politichicks reported, the voter asked, “Are you the candidate who says ‘I can’t stand this bipartisanship’ and is candid against the Speaker for being candid or are you the candidate that grades reports, questions the third highest ranking member –”

    He eventually got out his full question: “My question is: which candidate are you? The guy who can’t stand bipartisanship bickering or the guy who holds mock interventions, grades reports and questions the third highest ranking member of a political institution? That’s my question.”

    Like any good congressman, Takano said f–k this sh-t, this is MY town hall. No, really, he said this minus the swearing.

    “Excuse me sir!” Takano said, raising his voice. “Excuse me sir! This isn’t your forum. This is my forum! This isn’t a public forum. This is my forum.”

    The Mirror phoned Takano’s office for comment. We’re awaiting a comment from spokesman Brett Morrow.

  116. While Obama contemplates his navel and his legacy, the voters have weighed in. Only now do they see him as an abject failure which he is and always was.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/09/poll-majority-see-obama-as-divisive-failure

    Big media blinded them to his character flaws and experience deficits. And, they turned him into a cross between Christ and the Shakespearian figure Othello. And that is the cause in fact.

    Yes, I hold voters accountable. They are functional idiots, and the record speaks for itself.

    However, he never would have gotten to where he could destroy the country without the over the top support of him by big media–rigging the debates, savaging his opponents, hiding the truth and functioning as his mouthpiece.

    So when big media endeavors to separate itself from Obama, through a half hearted confession by Chuck Todd that big media has lost touch and credibility, I say fuck off. I say it is too little too late/

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/09/08/Chuck-Todd-Admits-MSM-Have-Lost-Touch-Credibility-Proves-It-By-On-First-MTP

    You, big media, are dead to me. Your credibility is no longer at issue. You have none. Consequently, I believe nothing you say. Occasionally, you may say something true, but I have no interest in trying to pick the fly shit out of the pepper.

    I hope millions of Americans will take the same pledge.

  117. Dot48
    I remember you, welcome back. I understand your concerns, you are not alone regarding your concerns. I remember you were a strong supporter and frequent poster.

  118. I have no doubt the fraud will give complete amnesty the day after elections.
    There is no real opposition. Who will stop him? No one. He does as he pleases.This is a nightmare.

  119. This mess is about to rear its head again…..What a mess Obama and his team are making. The US is going to be mired in this shit for years again.

    http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/resurgent-taliban-threaten-exit-strategy-afghanistan/8283

    Resurgent Taliban threaten US exit strategy for Afghanistan

    In parts of Helmand province, the UK and the US lost more soldiers in the long Afghan war than any other Afghan area. Helmand – where the fighting was long and hard. Helmand – where so many lost limbs or were otherwise terribly mutilated in a long and now lost war by a Nato now thoroughly preoccupied with matters elsewhere.

    But on 6 September the New York Times published an important report with the story Kabuli officials want to cover up and nobody anywhere near Nato would want to tell.

    In Helmand across the summer a fierce offensive has been fought, and the Times quotes two Afghan army generals and local police and government officials, all telling an uncomfortable truth.

    They are saying more than 200 police officers and Afghan soldiers have been killed there across the summer, and one key town, Musa Qala – over which the British fought – is in danger of falling again to Taliban control.

    09 taliban r w Resurgent Taliban threaten US exit strategy for Afghanistan

    The Times says:

    “‘The situation is deteriorating and the Taliban are almost in the bazaar,’ the governor of Musa Qala district, Haji-Mohammad Sharif, said Friday night. ‘If the situation remains the same, the district will soon fall to the hands of the Taliban.’”

    Officials say the Musa Qala fighting has been particularly heavy in the past 10 days, but there has also been a sustained offensive in Sangin, where I reported on successive British army units patrolling the poppy fields down the years and claiming to be building firm relations with the local leaders for a transition one day in the future, to Afghan army forces.

    That day of handover is well past now, and matters do not look good for the Afghan forces. According to one New York Times source, an army general speaking on condition of anonymity, the Taliban have launched 788 attacks in the past three months in Sangin and in two neighbouring districts, Nowzad and Kajaki – all of these names more than familiar to any British soldier who spent time in Helmand.

    The article continues:

    “..the general said 71 Afghan National Army soldiers have been killed and 214 wounded since June, while 159 police officers have been killed and 219 wounded in Sangin district. That total of 230 deaths would exceed the number of British and American marines killed in Sangin during the entire war, and both countries lost more military personnel in Sangin than in any other Afghan district.

    “‘If our forces do not get enough support and enough weapons and ammunition, the battle will get out of control in Sangin, and once the enemy take control of the district, it will be even harder to get them out,’ said Gen Juma Gul Himat, head of Helmand’s provincial police department.”

    The world needs to wake up to what is happening when casualties are being counted in their hundreds. Also, when the Taliban are emerging from the long period of hit-and-run insurgency and IED attacks to frontal assaults involving scores, hundreds of fighters. This is going back to the early years of the war and the way they fought in southern Afghanistan because they could effectively do so without unsustainable losses.

    The British and American politicians and military sold their exit from Afghanistan on the basis of the Afghan police and army being up to the job. The important picture emerging from the New York Times in the past few days belies that strategy’s effectiveness.

  120. As I said, who is there to stop the fraud from doing anything? Certainly NOT the opposition…what opposition one might ask.
    _________________________________________

    Ace of Spades

    September 09, 2014
    GOP Congressmen Okay With Unilateral Presidential War-Making
    —Ace

    I favor action against IS.

    However, I also favor the Constitution.

    In order to avoid a political debate on the right — where some less hawkish or more pacifist-leaning libertarians might object to an AUMF, or want limitations written into it, while more hawkish people want no limitations — and to avoid any news before an election, our political leadership is going along with Obama’s plan to take the country to war without the actual consent of the governed.

    Via the NYT:

    Democratic leaders in the Senate and Republican leaders in the House want to avoid a public vote to authorize force, fearing the unknown political consequences eight weeks before the midterm elections on Nov. 4.
    “A lot of people would like to stay on the sideline and say, ‘Just bomb the place and tell us about it later,'” said Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia, who supports having an authorization vote. “It’s an election year. A lot of Democrats don’t know how it would play in their party, and Republicans don’t want to change anything. We like the path we’re on now. We can denounce it if it goes bad, and praise it if it goes well and ask what took him so long.”

    Allah observes that Congress’ plan is apparently to avoid responsibility and ultimate blame by simply ceding more and more power to the unchecked executive.

  121. gonzotx
    September 9, 2014 at 12:38 pm

    I have no doubt the fraud will give complete amnesty the day after elections.
    There is no real opposition. Who will stop him? No one. He does as he pleases.This is a nightmare.
    ——————–
    Gonzo, you are quite correct that he can do it

    And, it is obvious that he will

    But what is less obvious is the impact it will have

    I think it will destroy any hope he might have for a legacy

    Because what is happening now is a light bulb has gone on with the elites

    When USA Today says he should not do this without congressional support

    And when NBC admits that they have lost credibility by their failure to report the effects

    And when we find terrorists, spreaders of disease and other undesirables in this mix

    And when his party loses control of Congress

    And when the scandals of his administration are exposed

    And when the thousand misfortunes hit the country owing to his debased leadership

    He will become something of a leper in the ranks of our presidents

    The Wall Street Journal had an article this morning about the milenium selfies, and the yuppy wealthies

    Delusion on the won hand, greed on the other–is what the country has become.

    No small thanks to him.

    He is the quintessential selfie

    A nation of selfies and wealthies cannot long endure.

    Actually, I think there is some danger in this for him, but I am equally sure that he does not see it now.

    It will either destroy his last best chance for a legacy, other than abject failure on all fronts,

    Or else, it will become the new normal for future president and will change our system of government permanently

    Because

  122. Gonzo, you are quite correct that he can do it

    And, it is obvious that he will

    But what is less obvious is the impact it will have

    I think it will destroy any hope he might have for a legacy
    +++++++++++++++++++++++

    That is the least of my concerns, his legacy, and his, I think. He will have done the work set out for him by Soro’s and reap million of dollars. He could care less.
    The Country will be forever transformed.

  123. Wbb,

    Were you not interested in Jim Webb? From Bloomberg via ACE

    2016 ELECTIONS
    Could Jim Webb Mount Credible Challenge to Clinton?
    196 SEP 7, 2014 11:00 AM EDT
    By Albert R. Hunt
    Jim Webb could be Hillary Clinton’s worst nightmare.

    The former one-term Virginia senator and Vietnam War veteran is making sounds about running for president as a Democrat. He was in Iowa last month; a New Hampshire trip may be in the offing, and he’s giving a major speech at the National Press Club in two weeks.

    He seems an improbable candidate. He has taken illiberal positions, was President Ronald Reagan’s Navy secretary, has few relationships within the Democratic Party, and has no serious fundraising network.

    What he does possess is a long-held and forceful opposition to U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya, and potentially Syria, as well as solid anti-Wall Street credentials. In Democratic primaries, these may be Clinton’s greatest impediments to rallying a hard-core activist base.

    In 2002, Webb warned of the perils of invading and occupying Iraq; he has been proven right by the violence and sectarian strife of the post-Saddam Hussein era. As a senator, Clinton voted for the war and supported it for years. She recently acknowledged she had been wrong.

    As secretary of state, Clinton was the chief advocate in the Barack Obama administration for intervening against Muammar Qaddafi. When the Libyan dictator was toppled and killed in 2011, she thought it would be her signature foreign-policy achievement.

    Webb, then a senator, adamantly opposed this venture. The U.S. has since withdrawn its personnel from Libya, and radical jihadists now occupy a compound belonging to the U.S. embassy.

    Clinton recently said she disagreed with Obama’s decision not to intervene in the Syrian civil war. Webb warns that the Syrian opposition includes not only elements friendly to the U.S., but also the radical Islamic State forces that have wreaked mayhem there and in Iraq, murdering thousands and beheading two American journalists. Syria, he has warned, is “Lebanon on steroids.”

    Clinton has close ties to Wall Street, a source of campaign funds for her and the Clinton Foundation. Since leaving office, she has received large speaking fees from hedge funds, private-equity companies and big banks such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

    Webb, 68, has long taken a populist, anti-Wall Street stance. In 2007, he delivered the Democratic response to President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address. Webb declared that the health of American society should be measured “not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street.”

    He pushed a measure to slap a special tax on big bonuses paid out by Wall Street companies that received government assistance during the financial crisis. When it failed, he complained that Democrats, beholden to Wall Street, killed it.

    If Webb decides to run — fearlessness and unpredictability are his trademarks — there’s plenty of ammunition against him. He’s against gun control, and he has made comments that angered feminists, many of whom consider Clinton a cause as well as a candidate, and environmentalists. He also has been involved in numerous personal controversies.

    In a recent Virginia Senate debate, Republican Ed Gillespie sought to paint the moderate Democratic incumbent, Mark Warner, as too left, citing occasions when he didn’t join Webb in voting along a more conservative line.

    The maverick lawmaker had a few notable successes, passing a major veterans’ education bill, putting criminal justice reform on the agenda, and calling for a pivot to Asia before Obama was elected. He has criticized executive overreach by both Bush and Obama.

    A decorated war hero — he received the Navy Cross for “extraordinary heroism” — and author of nine books, he would run principally on the issues most likely to cut Clinton: opposition to an interventionist-centered foreign policy and softness toward Wall Street. He would bring more authenticity to these two issues than any other would-be Clinton challenger. In Iowa, he made no secret of his criticism of Clinton’s tenure at State.

    Clintonites will dismiss the Webb threat by pointing to his political weaknesses. But here’s a safe bet: They will closely monitor his Sept. 23 Press Club speech.

  124. gonzotx

    September 9, 2014 at 1:53 pm

    Wbb,

    Were you not interested in Jim Webb?

    ——————-
    Well, speaking of things that were, I liked Jim a lot. Hillary campaigned for him when he ran against Macaca Allen. I know he did not like what Obama was doing on health care, immigration etc. But his opposition was very passive. I do not see the money men rallying around him. Jim is too much on the side of the average American for their tastes.

    I think he would be an excellent choice for Vice President with Hillary at the top of the ticket. I am pretty damned sure that she would choose Evan Bayh, who is a creature of K street, just like his daddy. A friend of mine knows him well, and she believes he deceived his constituents on Obamacare, when he pretended to oppose it, then caved and it was later discovered that his wife has a big job with one of the health care companies that is a direct beneficiary.

    I would really like to see Hillary select Webb to be her vice president. But geography, demographics and temperament–Bayh is a weak sister, favor his selection over Webb.

  125. http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/09/nyt-here-are-all-the-obama-claims-that-wont-be-in-tomorrows-speech/

    When a Democratic President loses the New York Times, the lame-duck era has truly arrived. Barack Obama will give a speech tomorrow to outline his strategy for dealing with ISIS, which Obama admitted has been absent even while he described the threat as “jayvees” to al-Qaeda and Iraq as a success story for his administration. The NYT’s Peter Baker helpfully provides a scorecard of ignorance when it comes to Obama’s foreign policy for speechwatchers to follow:

    When President Obama addresses the nation on Wednesday to explain his plan to defeat Islamic extremists in Iraq and Syria, it is a fair bet he will not call them the “JV team.”

    Nor does he seem likely to describe Iraq as “sovereign, stable and self-reliant” with a “representative government.” And presumably he will not assert after more than a decade of conflict that “the tide of war is receding.”

    As he seeks to rally Americans behind a new military campaign in the Middle East, Mr. Obama finds his own past statements coming back to haunt him. Time and again, he has expressed assessments of the world that in the harsh glare of hindsight look out of kilter with the changed reality he now confronts.

    Baker duly notes that the White House has tried to spin away the “jayvees” statement and other such pronouncements, but Baker isn’t interested in carrying water for the administration on that score either:

    But the transcript of the New Yorker interview showed that Mr. Obama made his JV team comment directly after being asked about terrorists in Iraq, Syria and Africa, which would include ISIS. After Mr. Obama’s initial answer, Mr. Remnick pointed out that “that JV team just took over Fallujah,” a city in western Iraq seized by ISIS. Mr. Obama replied that terrorism in many places around the world was not necessarily “a direct threat to us or something that we have to wade into.”

    Journalistic organizations like PolitiFact, Factcheck.org and The Washington Post’s Fact Checker all rejected the contention that Mr. Obama was not referring to ISIS when he made his comment about JV teams.

    In other words, Obama lied on television in his interview with Chuck Todd. That’s a rather startling narrative for the Times to take with Obama, even implicitly. Baker then goes on to explore Obama’s list of feel-good statements about pulling out of Iraq, such as “the tide of war is receding,” that the withdrawal would be “leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq with a representative government,” and the now-infamous “red line” on Syria. In each case, the White House now argues that these comments were aspirational, which is hardly the context in which they were delivered at the time.

    Where does that leave Obama on the cusp of his big war speech? Grasping for straws, as Baker quotes author Aaron David Miller at the end of the article. Having blown his credibility on these obviously false claims regarding the region, Obama has little hope now of persuading Americans that he now knows what he’s doing in the Middle East.

    John Boehner wants to hear a coherent strategy for the US to confront and combat terror from Obama tomorrow, one that “goes after ISIS and destroys them.” Boehner warned against more tactical announcements, saying that they can’t be assessed until Obama explains his overall strategy. “Anyone who thinks this is just an Iraq-Syria issue,” he told reporters, “is not paying much attention to what’s happening around the world.” That is, of course, the impression voters have formed of Obama, and the first thing he has to dispel tomorrow.

Comments are closed.